Comparing senior residents performance to radiologists in lung cancer detection

Background: Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, can be survived if early detection through screening programs occurs. However if a large scale lung cancer screening program needs to be implemented, it may require a substantial increase in qualified readers’ numbers. To investigate whether senior radiology residents may potentially increase the pool of available readers in screening for lung cancer, by comparing their performance with that of board-certified radiologists. Methodology: Twenty board-certified radiologists and ten senior residents read sixty chest CT scans. Thirty cases had surgically or biopsy-proven lung cancer and the remaining thirty were cancer-free cases. The cancer cases were validated by four expert radiologists who located the malignant lung nodules. Reader performance was evaluated by calculating sensitivity, location sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) and sensitivity at fixed specificity = 0.8. Results: Readers had the following (radiologists, residents) pairs of values: sensitivity = (0.782, 0.687); location sensitivity = (0.702, 0.597); specificity = (0.8, 0.83); AUC = (0.844, 0.85) and sensitivity for fixed 0.8 specificity = (0.74, 0.73). Conclusion: Initial findings suggest that senior residents compare favorably with board-certified radiologists based on the similarity of the AUCs and the summary ROC curves in terms of the ability to discriminate between diseased and non-diseased patients. However, they have demonstrated significantly lower detection sensitivity than board-certified radiologists and may require additional training, considering the importance of having high sensitivity when screening for cancer.

[1]  Richard C. Pais,et al.  The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) and Image Database Resource Initiative (IDRI): a completed reference database of lung nodules on CT scans. , 2011, Medical physics.

[2]  D. Aberle,et al.  Results of initial low-dose computed tomographic screening for lung cancer. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  P. Brennan,et al.  A review of lung cancer screening and the role of computer-aided detection. , 2017, Clinical radiology.

[4]  C. Gatsonis,et al.  Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening , 2012 .

[5]  Anthony J. Sherbondy,et al.  Pulmonary nodules on multi-detector row CT scans: performance comparison of radiologists and computer-aided detection. , 2005, Radiology.

[6]  John K Field,et al.  Comparing the performance of trained radiographers against experienced radiologists in the UK lung cancer screening (UKLS) trial. , 2016, The British journal of radiology.

[7]  C E Metz,et al.  The "proper" binormal model: parametric receiver operating characteristic curve estimation with degenerate data. , 1997, Academic radiology.

[8]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[9]  Hong Bu,et al.  China national lung cancer screening guideline with low-dose computed tomography (2015 version) , 2015, Thoracic cancer.

[10]  M. L. R. D. Christenson,et al.  Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic Screening , 2012 .

[11]  Stephen L Hillis,et al.  Equivalence of binormal likelihood‐ratio and bi‐chi‐squared ROC curve models , 2016, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  John K Field,et al.  Performance of trained radiographers in lung nodule detection: prospective comparison with experienced radiologists in lung cancer screening , 2013 .

[13]  K. Marten,et al.  Computer-assisted detection of pulmonary nodules: performance evaluation of an expert knowledge-based detection system in consensus reading with experienced and inexperienced chest radiologists , 2004, European Radiology.

[14]  F. Samuelson,et al.  The average receiver operating characteristic curve in multireader multicase imaging studies. , 2014, The British journal of radiology.

[15]  H. Kauczor,et al.  ESR/ERS white paper on lung cancer screening , 2015, European Respiratory Journal.

[16]  Carlo Catalano,et al.  Computer-aided Detection (CAD) in Lung Cancer Screening at Chest MDCT: ROC Analysis of CAD Versus Radiologist Performance , 2007, Journal of thoracic imaging.

[17]  W Jorritsma,et al.  Improving the radiologist-CAD interaction: designing for appropriate trust. , 2015, Clinical radiology.

[18]  W. Heindel,et al.  Detection of pulmonary nodules at multirow-detector CT: effectiveness of double reading to improve sensitivity at standard-dose and low-dose chest CT , 2004, European Radiology.

[19]  John K Field,et al.  The impact of trained radiographers as concurrent readers on performance and reading time of experienced radiologists in the UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) trial , 2017, European Radiology.

[20]  C. Metz,et al.  "Proper" Binormal ROC Curves: Theory and Maximum-Likelihood Estimation. , 1999, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[21]  K. Awai,et al.  Pulmonary nodules at chest CT: effect of computer-aided diagnosis on radiologists' detection performance. , 2004, Radiology.

[22]  M. Pepe The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction , 2003 .

[23]  P C Brennan,et al.  Radiologist performance in the detection of lung cancer using CT. , 2019, Clinical radiology.

[24]  A. Leung,et al.  Computer-aided detection (CAD) of lung nodules in CT scans: radiologist performance and reading time with incremental CAD assistance , 2010, European Radiology.

[25]  Stephen M. Moore,et al.  The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA): Maintaining and Operating a Public Information Repository , 2013, Journal of Digital Imaging.