This study aims to assess and compare two state-of-the-art deep learning approaches for segmenting four thoracic organs at risk (OAR)-the esophagus, trachea, heart, and aorta-in CT images in the context of radiotherapy planning. We compare a multi-organ segmentation approach and the fusion of multiple single-organ models, each dedicated to one OAR. All were trained using nnU-Net with the default parameters and the full-resolution configuration. We evaluate their robustness with adversarial perturbations, and their generalizability on external datasets, and explore potential biases introduced by expert corrections compared to fully manual delineations. The two approaches show excellent performance with an average Dice score of 0.928 for the multi-class setting and 0.930 when fusing the four single-organ models. The evaluation of external datasets and common procedural adversarial noise demonstrates the good generalizability of these models. In addition, expert corrections of both models show significant bias to the original automated segmentation. The average Dice score between the two corrections is 0.93, ranging from 0.88 for the trachea to 0.98 for the heart. Both approaches demonstrate excellent performance and generalizability in segmenting four thoracic OARs, potentially improving efficiency in radiotherapy planning. However, the multi-organ setting proves advantageous for its efficiency, requiring less training time and fewer resources, making it a preferable choice for this task. Moreover, corrections of AI segmentation by clinicians may lead to biases in the results of AI approaches. A test set, manually annotated, should be used to assess the performance of such methods. Question While manual delineation of thoracic organs at risk is labor-intensive, prone to errors, and time-consuming, evaluation of AI models performing this task lacks robustness. Findings The deep-learning model using the nnU-Net framework showed excellent performance, generalizability, and robustness in segmenting thoracic organs in CT, enhancing radiotherapy planning efficiency. Clinical relevance Automatic segmentation of thoracic organs at risk can save clinicians time without compromising the quality of the delineations, and extensive evaluation across diverse settings demonstrates the potential of integrating such models into clinical practice.

To evaluate the image quality and lung nodule detectability of ultralow-dose CT (ULDCT) with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction-V (ASiR-V) post-processed using a deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR)-based image domain compared to low-dose CT (LDCT) and ULDCT without DLIR. A total of 210 patients undergoing lung cancer screening underwent LDCT (mean ± SD, 0.81 ± 0.28 mSv) and ULDCT (0.17 ± 0.03 mSv) scans. ULDCT images were reconstructed with ASiR-V (ULDCT-ASiR-V) and post-processed using DLIR (ULDCT-DLIR). The quality of the three CT images was analyzed. Three radiologists detected and measured pulmonary nodules on all CT images, with LDCT results serving as references. Nodule conspicuity was assessed using a five-point Likert scale, followed by further statistical analyses. A total of 463 nodules were detected using LDCT. The image noise of ULDCT-DLIR decreased by 60% compared to that of ULDCT-ASiR-V and was lower than that of LDCT (p < 0.001). The subjective image quality scores for ULDCT-DLIR (4.4 [4.1, 4.6]) were also higher than those for ULDCT-ASiR-V (3.6 [3.1, 3.9]) (p < 0.001). The overall nodule detection rates for ULDCT-ASiR-V and ULDCT-DLIR were 82.1% (380/463) and 87.0% (403/463), respectively (p < 0.001). The percentage difference between diameters > 1 mm was 2.9% (ULDCT-ASiR-V vs. LDCT) and 0.5% (ULDCT-DLIR vs. LDCT) (p = 0.009). Scores of nodule imaging sharpness on ULDCT-DLIR (4.0 ± 0.68) were significantly higher than those on ULDCT-ASiR-V (3.2 ± 0.50) (p < 0.001). DLIR-based image domain improves image quality, nodule detection rate, nodule imaging sharpness, and nodule measurement accuracy of ASiR-V on ULDCT. Question Deep learning post-processing is simple and cheap compared with raw data processing, but its performance is not clear on ultralow-dose CT. Findings Deep learning post-processing enhanced image quality and improved the nodule detection rate and accuracy of nodule measurement of ultralow-dose CT. Clinical relevance Deep learning post-processing improves the practicability of ultralow-dose CT and makes it possible for patients with less radiation exposure during lung cancer screening.

Incidentally detected pulmonary nodules present a challenge in clinical routine with demand for reliable support systems for risk classification. We aimed to evaluate the performance of the lung-cancer-prediction-convolutional-neural-network (LCP-CNN), a deep learning-based approach, in comparison to multiparametric statistical methods (Brock model and Lung-RADS®) for risk classification of nodules in cohorts with different risk profiles and underlying pulmonary diseases. Retrospective analysis was conducted on non-contrast and contrast-enhanced CT scans containing pulmonary nodules measuring 5-30 mm. Ground truth was defined by histology or follow-up stability. The final analysis was performed on 297 patients with 422 eligible nodules, of which 105 nodules were malignant. Classification performance of the LCP-CNN, Brock model, and Lung-RADS® was evaluated in terms of diagnostic accuracy measurements including ROC-analysis for different subcohorts (total, screening, emphysema, and interstitial lung disease). LCP-CNN demonstrated superior performance compared to the Brock model in total and screening cohorts (AUC 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89-0.94) and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89-0.96)). Superior sensitivity of LCP-CNN was demonstrated compared to the Brock model and Lung-RADS® in total, screening, and emphysema cohorts for a risk threshold of 5%. Superior sensitivity of LCP-CNN was also shown across all disease groups compared to the Brock model at a threshold of 65%, compared to Lung-RADS® sensitivity was better or equal. No significant differences in the performance of LCP-CNN were found between subcohorts. This study offers further evidence of the potential to integrate deep learning-based decision support systems into pulmonary nodule classification workflows, irrespective of the individual patient risk profile and underlying pulmonary disease. Question Is a deep-learning approach (LCP-CNN) superior to multiparametric models (Brock model, Lung-RADS®) in classifying pulmonary nodule risk across varied patient profiles? Findings LCP-CNN shows superior performance in risk classification of pulmonary nodules compared to multiparametric models with no significant impact on risk profiles and structural pulmonary diseases. Clinical relevance LCP-CNN offers efficiency and accuracy, addressing limitations of traditional models, such as variations in manual measurements or lack of patient data, while producing robust results. Such approaches may therefore impact clinical work by complementing or even replacing current approaches.

This study compared the characteristics of lesions suspicious for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and their LI-RADS classifications in adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and deep learning reconstruction (DLR) to those of MR images, along with radiologist confidence. This prospective single-center trial included patients who underwent four-phase liver CT and multiphasic contrast-enhanced MRI within 7 days from February to August 2023. The lesion characteristics, LI-RADS classifications and confidence scores according to two radiologists on the ASIR, DLR and MRI techniques were compared. If the patient had at least one lesion, he was included in the HCC group, otherwise in the non-HCC group. MRI being the technique with the best sensitivity, concordance of lesions characteristics and LI-RADS classifications were calculated by weighted kappa between the ASIR and MRI and between the DLR and MRI. The confidence scores are expressed as the means and standard deviations. Eighty-nine patients were enrolled, 52 in the HCC group (67 years ± 9 [mean ± SD], 46 men) and 37 in the non-HCC group (68 years ± 9, 33 men). The concordance coefficient between the LI-RADS classification by ASIR and MRI was 0.64 [0.52; 0.76], showing good agreement, that by DLR and MRI was 0.83 [0.73; 0.92], showing excellent agreement. The diagnostic confidence in ASIR was 3.31 ± 0.95 (mean ± SD) and 3.0 ± 1.11, that in the DLR was 3.9 ± 0.88 and 4.11 ± 0.75, that in the MRI was 4.46 ± 0.80 and 4.57 ± 0.80. DLR provided excellent LI-RADS classification concordance with MRI, whereas ASIR provided good concordance. The radiologists' confidence was greater in the DLR than in the ASIR but remained highest in the MR group. Question Does the use of deep learning reconstructions (DLR) improve LI-RADS classification of suspicious hepatocellular carcinoma lesions compared to adaptive statistical iterative reconstructions (ASIR)? Findings DLR demonstrated superior concordance of LI-RADS classification with MRI compared to ASIR. It also provided greater diagnostic confidence than ASIR. Clinical relevance The use of DLR enhances radiologists' ability to visualize and characterize lesions suspected of being HCC, as well as their LI-RADS classification. Moreover, it also boosts their confidence in interpreting these images.

To evaluate the repeatability of AI-based automatic measurement of vertebral and cardiovascular markers on low-dose chest CT. We included participants of the population-based Imaging in Lifelines (ImaLife) study with low-dose chest CT at baseline and 3-4 month follow-up. An AI system (AI-Rad Companion chest CT prototype) performed automatic segmentation and quantification of vertebral height and density, aortic diameters, heart volume (cardiac chambers plus pericardial fat), and coronary artery calcium volume (CACV). A trained researcher visually checked segmentation accuracy. We evaluated the repeatability of adequate AI-based measurements at baseline and repeat scan using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), relative differences, and change in CACV risk categorization, assuming no physiological change. Overall, 632 participants (63 ± 11 years; 56.6% men) underwent short-term repeat CT (mean interval, 3.9 ± 1.8 months). Visual assessment showed adequate segmentation in both baseline and repeat scan for 98.7% of vertebral measurements, 80.1-99.4% of aortic measurements (except for the sinotubular junction (65.2%)), and 86.0% of CACV. For heart volume, 53.5% of segmentations were adequate at baseline and repeat scans. ICC for adequately segmented cases showed excellent agreement for all biomarkers (ICC > 0.9). Relative difference between baseline and repeat measurements was < 4% for vertebral and aortic measurements, 7.5% for heart volume, and 28.5% for CACV. There was high concordance in CACV risk categorization (81.2%). In low-dose chest CT, segmentation accuracy of AI-based software was high for vertebral, aortic, and CACV evaluation and relatively low for heart volume. There was excellent repeatability of vertebral and aortic measurements and high concordance in overall CACV risk categorization. Question Can AI algorithms for opportunistic screening in chest CT obtain an accurate and repeatable result when applied to multiple CT scans of the same participant? Findings Vertebral and aortic analysis showed accurate segmentation and excellent repeatability; coronary calcium segmentation was generally accurate but showed modest repeatability due to a non-electrocardiogram-triggered protocol. Clinical relevance Opportunistic screening for diseases outside the primary purpose of the CT scan is time-consuming. AI allows automated vertebral, aortic, and coronary artery calcium (CAC) assessment, with highly repeatable outcomes of vertebral and aortic biomarkers and high concordance in overall CAC categorization.

Definitive chemoradiation is the primary treatment for locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (LAHNSCC). Optimising outcome predictions requires validated biomarkers, since TNM8 and HPV could have limitations. Radiomics may enhance risk stratification. This single-centre observational study collected clinical data and baseline CT scans from 171 LAHNSCC patients treated with chemoradiation. The dataset was divided into training (80%) and test (20%) sets, with a 5-fold cross-validation on the training set. Researchers extracted 108 radiomics features from each primary tumour and applied survival analysis and classification models to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and 5-year progression, respectively. Performance was evaluated using inverse probability of censoring weights and c-index for the PFS model and AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the 5-year progression model. Feature importance was measured by the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method and patient stratification was assessed through Kaplan-Meier curves. The final dataset included 171 LAHNSCC patients, with 53% experiencing disease progression at 5 years. The random survival forest model best predicted PFS, with an AUC of 0.64 and CI of 0.66 on the test set, highlighting 4 radiomics features and TNM8 as significant contributors. It successfully stratified patients into low and high-risk groups (log-rank p < 0.005). The extreme gradient boosting model most effectively predicted a 5-year progression, incorporating 12 radiomics features and four clinical variables, achieving an AUC of 0.74, sensitivity of 0.53, specificity of 0.81, and accuracy of 0.66 on the test set. The combined clinical-radiomics model improved the standard TNM8 and clinical variables in predicting 5-year progression though further validation is necessary. Question There is an unmet need for non-invasive biomarkers to guide treatment in locally advanced head and neck cancer. Findings Clinical data (TNM8 staging, primary tumour site, age, and smoking) plus radiomics improved 5-year progression prediction compared with the clinical comprehensive model or TNM staging alone. Clinical relevance SHAP simplifies complex machine learning radiomics models for clinicians by using easy-to-understand graphical representations, promoting explainability.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, largely due to its poor five-year survival rate and frequent late-stage diagnosis. A significant barrier to early detection even in high-risk cohorts is that the pancreas often appears morphologically normal during the pre-diagnostic phase. Yet, the disease can progress rapidly from subclinical stages to widespread metastasis, undermining the effectiveness of screening. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) applied to cross-sectional imaging has shown significant potential in identifying subtle, early-stage changes in pancreatic tissue that are often imperceptible to the human eye. Moreover, AI-driven imaging also aids in the discovery of prognostic and predictive biomarkers, essential for personalized treatment planning. This article uniquely integrates a critical discussion on AI's role in detecting visually occult PDAC on pre-diagnostic imaging, addresses challenges of model generalizability, and emphasizes solutions like standardized datasets and clinical workflows. By focusing on both technical advancements and practical implementation, this article provides a forward-thinking conceptual framework that bridges current gaps in AI-driven PDAC research.

Adenomatous colorectal polyps require endoscopic resection, as opposed to non-adenomatous hyperplastic colorectal polyps. This study aims to evaluate the effect of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted differentiation of adenomatous and non-adenomatous colorectal polyps at CT colonography on radiologists' therapy management. Five board-certified radiologists evaluated CT colonography images with colorectal polyps of all sizes and morphologies retrospectively and decided whether the depicted polyps required endoscopic resection. After a primary unassisted reading based on current guidelines, a second reading with access to the classification of a radiomics-based random-forest AI-model labelling each polyp as "non-adenomatous" or "adenomatous" was performed. Performance was evaluated using polyp histopathology as the reference standard. 77 polyps in 59 patients comprising 118 polyp image series (47% supine position, 53% prone position) were evaluated unassisted and AI-assisted by five independent board-certified radiologists, resulting in a total of 1180 readings (subsequent polypectomy: yes or no). AI-assisted readings had higher accuracy (76% +/- 1% vs. 84% +/- 1%), sensitivity (78% +/- 6% vs. 85% +/- 1%), and specificity (73% +/- 8% vs. 82% +/- 2%) in selecting polyps eligible for polypectomy (p < 0.001). Inter-reader agreement was improved in the AI-assisted readings (Fleiss' kappa 0.69 vs. 0.92). AI-based characterisation of colorectal polyps at CT colonography as a second reader might enable a more precise selection of polyps eligible for subsequent endoscopic resection. However, further studies are needed to confirm this finding and histopathologic polyp evaluation is still mandatory. Question This is the first study evaluating the impact of AI-based polyp classification in CT colonography on radiologists' therapy management. Findings Compared with unassisted reading, AI-assisted reading had higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in selecting polyps eligible for polypectomy. Clinical relevance Integrating an AI tool for colorectal polyp classification in CT colonography could further improve radiologists' therapy recommendations.

The aim of this study was to intraindividually compare the conspicuity of focal liver lesions (FLLs) between low- and ultra-low-dose computed tomography (CT) with deep learning reconstruction (DLR) and standard-dose CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) from a single CT using dual-split scan in patients with suspected liver metastasis via a noninferiority design. This prospective study enrolled participants who met the eligibility criteria at 2 tertiary hospitals in South Korea from June 2022 to January 2023. The criteria included ( a ) being aged between 20 and 85 years and ( b ) having suspected or known liver metastases. Dual-source CT scans were conducted, with the standard radiation dose divided in a 2:1 ratio between tubes A and B (67% and 33%, respectively). The voltage settings of 100/120 kVp were selected based on the participant's body mass index (<30 vs ≥30 kg/m 2 ). For image reconstruction, MBIR was utilized for standard-dose (100%) images, whereas DLR was employed for both low-dose (67%) and ultra-low-dose (33%) images. Three radiologists independently evaluated FLL conspicuity, the probability of metastasis, and subjective image quality using a 5-point Likert scale, in addition to quantitative signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios. The noninferiority margins were set at -0.5 for conspicuity and -0.1 for detection. One hundred thirty-three participants (male = 58, mean body mass index = 23.0 ± 3.4 kg/m 2 ) were included in the analysis. The low- and ultra-low- dose had a lower radiation dose than the standard-dose (median CT dose index volume: 3.75, 1.87 vs 5.62 mGy, respectively, in the arterial phase; 3.89, 1.95 vs 5.84 in the portal venous phase, P < 0.001 for all). Median FLL conspicuity was lower in the low- and ultra-low-dose scans compared with the standard-dose (3.0 [interquartile range, IQR: 2.0, 4.0], 3.0 [IQR: 1.0, 4.0] vs 3.0 [IQR: 2.0, 4.0] in the arterial phase; 4.0 [IQR: 1.0, 5.0], 3.0 [IQR: 1.0, 4.0] vs 4.0 [IQR: 2.0, 5.0] in the portal venous phases), yet within the noninferiority margin ( P < 0.001 for all). FLL detection was also lower but remained within the margin (lesion detection rate: 0.772 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.727, 0.812], 0.754 [0.708, 0.795], respectively) compared with the standard-dose (0.810 [95% CI: 0.770, 0.844]). Sensitivity for liver metastasis differed between the standard- (80.6% [95% CI: 76.0, 84.5]), low-, and ultra-low-doses (75.7% [95% CI: 70.2, 80.5], 73.7 [95% CI: 68.3, 78.5], respectively, P < 0.001 for both), whereas specificity was similar ( P > 0.05). Low- and ultra-low-dose CT with DLR showed noninferior FLL conspicuity and detection compared with standard-dose CT with MBIR. Caution is needed due to a potential decrease in sensitivity for metastasis ( clinicaltrials.gov/NCT05324046 ).

In clinical work, there are difficulties in distinguishing pulmonary contusion(PC) from bacterial pneumonia(BP) on CT images by the naked eye alone when the history of trauma is unknown. Artificial intelligence is widely used in medical imaging, but its diagnostic performance for pulmonary contusion is unclear. In this study, artificial intelligence was used for the first time to identify lung contusion and bacterial pneumonia, and its diagnostic performance was compared with that of manual. In this retrospective study, 2179 patients between April 2016 and July 2022 from two hospitals were collected and divided into a training set, an internal validation set, an external validation set. PC and BP were automatically recognized, segmented using VB-net and radiomics features were automatically extracted. Four machine learning algorithms including Decision Trees, Logistic Regression, Random Forests and Support Vector Machines(SVM) were using to built the models. De-long test was used to compare the performance among models. The best performing model and four radiologists diagnosed the external validation set, and compare the diagnostic efficacy of human and artificial intelligence. VB-net automatically detected and segmented PC and BP. Among the four machine learning models we've built, De-long test showed that SVM model had the best performance, with AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.998 (95% CI: 0.995-1), 0.980, 0.979, 0.982 in the training set, 0.891 (95% CI: 0.854-0.928), 0.979, 0.750, 0.860 in the internal validation set, 0.885 (95% CI: 0.850-0.920), 0.903, 0.976, 0.794 in the external validation set. The diagnostic ability of the SVM model was superior to that of human (P < 0.05). Our VB-net automatically recognizes and segments PC and BP in chest CT images. SVM model based on radiomics features can quickly and accurately differentiate between them with higher accuracy than experienced radiologist.