A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Low-Dose CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Computer-aided Detection of Missed Lung Cancers. | LitMetric

Low-Dose CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Computer-aided Detection of Missed Lung Cancers.

Radiology

From the Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY 10029 (M.L., W.T., D.M.X., A.C.J., C.I.H., D.Y.); and School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (A.P.R.).

Published: October 2016

Purpose To update information regarding the usefulness of computer-aided detection (CAD) systems with a focus on the most critical category, that of missed cancers at earlier imaging, for cancers that manifest as a solid nodule. Materials and Methods By using a HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved protocol where informed consent was obtained, 50 lung cancers that manifested as a solid nodule on computed tomographic (CT) scans in annual rounds of screening (time 1) were retrospectively identified that could, in retrospect, be identified on the previous CT scans (time 0). Four CAD systems were compared, which were referred to as CAD 1, CAD 2, CAD 3, and CAD 4. The total number of accepted CAD-system-detected nodules at time 0 was determined by consensus of two radiologists and the number of CAD-system-detected nodules that were rejected by the radiologists was also documented. Results At time 0 when all the cancers had been missed, CAD system detection rates for the cancers were 56%, 70%, 68%, and 60% (κ = 0.45) for CAD systems 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. At time 1, the rates were 74%, 82%, 82%, and 78% (κ = 0.32), respectively. The average diameter of the 50 cancers at time 0 and time 1 was 4.8 mm and 11.4 mm, respectively. The number of CAD-system-detected nodules that were rejected per CT scan for CAD systems 1-4 at time 0 was 7.4, 1.7, 0.6, and 4.5 respectively. Conclusion CAD systems detected up to 70% of lung cancers that were not detected by the radiologist but failed to detect about 20% of the lung cancers when they were identified by the radiologist, which suggests that CAD may be useful in the role of second reader. (©) RSNA, 2016.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016150063DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cad systems
20
lung cancers
16
cad cad
12
cad-system-detected nodules
12
cad
11
cancers
9
computer-aided detection
8
solid nodule
8
time
8
number cad-system-detected
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!