Assessing the inter-observer variability of Computer-Aided Nodule Assessment and Risk Yield (CANARY) to characterize lung adenocarcinomas

Lung adenocarcinoma (ADC), the most common lung cancer type, is recognized increasingly as a disease spectrum. To guide individualized patient care, a non-invasive means of distinguishing indolent from aggressive ADC subtypes is needed urgently. Computer-Aided Nodule Assessment and Risk Yield (CANARY) is a novel computed tomography (CT) tool that characterizes early ADCs by detecting nine distinct CT voxel classes, representing a spectrum of lepidic to invasive growth, within an ADC. CANARY characterization has been shown to correlate with ADC histology and patient outcomes. This study evaluated the inter-observer variability of CANARY analysis. Three novice observers segmented and analyzed independently 95 biopsy-confirmed lung ADCs from Vanderbilt University Medical Center/Nashville Veterans Administration Tennessee Valley Healthcare system (VUMC/TVHS) and the Mayo Clinic (Mayo). Inter-observer variability was measured using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). The average ICC for all CANARY classes was 0.828 (95% CI 0.76, 0.895) for the VUMC/TVHS cohort, and 0.852 (95% CI 0.804, 0.901) for the Mayo cohort. The most invasive voxel classes had the highest ICC values. To determine whether nodule size influenced inter-observer variability, an additional cohort of 49 sub-centimeter nodules from Mayo were also segmented by three observers, with similar ICC results. Our study demonstrates that CANARY ADC classification between novice CANARY users has an acceptably low degree of variability, and supports the further development of CANARY for clinical application.

[1]  Massimo Bellomi,et al.  Estimating Overdiagnosis in Low-Dose Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[2]  Richard A. Robb,et al.  Noninvasive Risk Stratification of Lung Adenocarcinoma using Quantitative Computed Tomography , 2014, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[3]  Lawrence H. Schwartz,et al.  Assessing Agreement between Radiomic Features Computed for Multiple CT Imaging Settings , 2016, PloS one.

[4]  Adam Wallis,et al.  The revised lung adenocarcinoma classification-an imaging guide. , 2014, Journal of thoracic disease.

[5]  Steinar Lundgren,et al.  Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI texture analysis for pretreatment prediction of clinical and pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer , 2014, NMR in biomedicine.

[6]  H. Hricak,et al.  Haralick texture analysis of prostate MRI: utility for differentiating non-cancerous prostate from prostate cancer and differentiating prostate cancers with different Gleason scores , 2015, European Radiology.

[7]  M. Stasi,et al.  Texture features on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: new potential biomarkers for prostate cancer aggressiveness , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  Hong Ye,et al.  Outcomes after stereotactic lung radiotherapy or wedge resection for stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  A. Dirksen,et al.  CT screening for lung cancer brings forward early disease. The randomised Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial: status after five annual screening rounds with low-dose CT , 2012, Thorax.

[10]  Richard A. Robb,et al.  Noninvasive Computed Tomography-based Risk Stratification of Lung Adenocarcinomas in the National Lung Screening Trial. , 2015, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[11]  Masahiro Tsuboi,et al.  International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International Multidisciplinary Classification of Lung Adenocarcinoma , 2011, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[12]  C. Wilshire,et al.  Surveillance of the Remaining Nodules after Resection of the Dominant Lung Adenocarcinoma is an Appropriate Follow-Up Strategy , 2014, Front. Surg..

[13]  Seijiro Sato,et al.  Limited resection for noninvasive bronchioloalveolar carcinoma diagnosed by intraoperative pathologic examination. , 2009, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[14]  M. Kuo,et al.  Radiogenomic analysis to identify imaging phenotypes associated with drug response gene expression programs in hepatocellular carcinoma. , 2007, Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR.

[15]  E. Halm,et al.  Limited Resection for the Treatment of Patients With Stage IA Lung Cancer , 2010, Annals of surgery.

[16]  Andre Dekker,et al.  Radiomics: the process and the challenges. , 2012, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[17]  Geoffrey D Rubin,et al.  Lung Nodule and Cancer Detection in Computed Tomography Screening , 2015, Journal of thoracic imaging.

[18]  Joseph O. Deasy,et al.  Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  B. Kramer,et al.  Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[20]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Morphometric analysis of white matter lesions in MR images: method and validation , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[21]  V. Moyer Screening for Lung Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[22]  P. Massion,et al.  The Pursuit of Noninvasive Diagnosis of Lung Cancer , 2016, Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

[23]  Srinivasan Rajagopalan,et al.  Noninvasive Characterization of the Histopathologic Features of Pulmonary Nodules of the Lung Adenocarcinoma Spectrum using Computer-Aided Nodule Assessment and Risk Yield (CANARY)—A Pilot Study , 2013, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.