MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400452529 · doi:10.1117/1.jmi.11.4.044502

Pulmonary nodule detection in low dose computed tomography using a medical-to-medical transfer learning approach

2024· article· en· W4400452529 on OpenAlex
J. Manokaran, Richa Mittal, Eranga Ukwatta

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsGuelph General HospitalUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMedicineComputed tomographyRadiologyNodule (geology)TomographyNuclear medicineMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death globally. Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) is the recommended imaging screening tool for the early detection of lung cancer. A fully automated computer-aided detection method for LDCT will greatly improve the existing clinical workflow. Most of the existing methods for lung detection are designed for high-dose CTs (HDCTs), and those methods cannot be directly applied to LDCTs due to domain shifts and inferior quality of LDCT images. In this work, we describe a semi-automated transfer learning-based approach for the early detection of lung nodules using LDCTs. Approach: In this work, we developed an algorithm based on the object detection model, you only look once (YOLO) to detect lung nodules. The YOLO model was first trained on CTs, and the pre-trained weights were used as initial weights during the retraining of the model on LDCTs using a medical-to-medical transfer learning approach. The dataset for this study was from a screening trial consisting of LDCTs acquired from 50 biopsy-confirmed lung cancer patients obtained over 3 consecutive years (T1, T2, and T3). About 60 lung cancer patients' HDCTs were obtained from a public dataset. The developed model was evaluated using a hold-out test set comprising 15 patient cases (93 slices with cancerous nodules) using precision, specificity, recall, and F1-score. The evaluation metrics were reported patient-wise on a per-year basis and averaged for 3 years. For comparative analysis, the proposed detection model was trained using pre-trained weights from the COCO dataset as the initial weights. A paired t-test and chi-squared test with an alpha value of 0.05 were used for statistical significance testing. Results: -value of 0.00034 for specificity. Conclusions: In this study, a semi-automated method was developed to detect lung nodules in LDCTs using HDCT pre-trained weights as the initial weights and retraining the model. Further, the results were compared by replacing HDCT pre-trained weights in the above approach with COCO pre-trained weights. The proposed method may identify early lung nodules during the screening program, reduce overdiagnosis and follow-ups due to misdiagnosis in LDCTs, start treatment options in the affected patients, and lower the mortality rate.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it