An Artificial Intelligence System for the Detection of Bladder Cancer via Cystoscopy: A Multicenter Diagnostic Study

Abstract Background Cystoscopy plays an important role in bladder cancer (BCa) diagnosis and treatment, but its sensitivity needs improvement. Artificial intelligence has shown promise in endoscopy, but few cystoscopic applications have been reported. We report a Cystoscopy Artificial Intelligence D...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:JNCI : Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2022-02, Vol.114 (2), p.220-227
Hauptverfasser: Wu, Shaoxu, Chen, Xiong, Pan, Jiexin, Dong, Wen, Diao, Xiayao, Zhang, Ruiyun, Zhang, Yonghai, Zhang, Yuanfeng, Qian, Guang, Chen, Hao, Lin, Haotian, Xu, Shizhong, Chen, Zhiwen, Zhou, Xiaozhou, Mei, Hongbing, Wu, Chenglong, Lv, Qiang, Yuan, Baorui, Chen, Zeshi, Liao, Wenjian, Yang, Xuefan, Chen, Haige, Huang, Jian, Lin, Tianxin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Background Cystoscopy plays an important role in bladder cancer (BCa) diagnosis and treatment, but its sensitivity needs improvement. Artificial intelligence has shown promise in endoscopy, but few cystoscopic applications have been reported. We report a Cystoscopy Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic System (CAIDS) for BCa diagnosis. Methods In total, 69 204 images from 10 729 consecutive patients from 6 hospitals were collected and divided into training, internal validation, and external validation sets. The CAIDS was built using a pyramid scene parsing network and transfer learning. A subset (n = 260) of the validation sets was used for a performance comparison between the CAIDS and urologists for complex lesion detection. The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Clopper-Pearson method. Results The diagnostic accuracies of the CAIDS were 0.977 (95% CI = 0.974 to 0.979) in the internal validation set and 0.990 (95% CI = 0.979 to 0.996), 0.982 (95% CI = 0.974 to 0.988), 0.978 (95% CI = 0.959 to 0.989), and 0.991 (95% CI = 0.987 to 0.994) in different external validation sets. In the CAIDS vs urologists’ comparisons, the CAIDS showed high accuracy and sensitivity (accuracy = 0.939, 95% CI = 0.902 to 0.964; sensitivity = 0.954, 95% CI = 0.902 to 0.983) with a short latency of 12 seconds, much more accurate and quicker than the expert urologists. Conclusions The CAIDS achieved accurate BCa detection with a short latency. The CAIDS may provide many clinical benefits, from increasing the diagnostic accuracy for BCa, even for commonly misdiagnosed cases such as flat cancerous tissue (carcinoma in situ), to reducing the operation time for cystoscopy.
ISSN:0027-8874
1460-2105
DOI:10.1093/jnci/djab179