Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computer-aided detection in computed tomography colonography: current status and problems with detection of early colorectal cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Radiation Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of computer-aided detection (CAD) in diagnosing early colorectal cancer using computed tomography colonography (CTC).

Materials and methods

A total of 30 CTC data sets for 30 early colorectal cancers in 30 patients were retrospectively reviewed by three radiologists. After primary evaluation, a second reading was performed using CAD findings. The readers evaluated each colorectal segment for the presence or absence of colorectal cancer using five confidence rating levels. To compare the assessment results, the sensitivity and specificity with and without CAD were calculated on the basis of the confidence rating, and differences in these variables were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

Results

The average sensitivities for the detection without and with CAD for the three readers were 81.6% and 75.6%, respectively. Among the three readers, only one reader improved sensitivity with CAD compared to that without. CAD decreased specificity in all three readers. CAD detected 100% of protruding lesions but only 69.2% of flat lesions. On ROC analysis, the diagnostic performance of all three readers was decreased by use of CAD.

Conclusion

Currently available CAD with CTC does not improve diagnostic performance for detecting early colorectal cancer. An improved CAD algorithm is required for detecting flat lesions and reducing the falsepositive rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Halligan S, Altman DG, Taylor SA, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Bartram CI, et al. CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology 2005;237:893–904.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sosna J, Morrin MM, Kruskal JB, Lavin PT, Rosen MP, Raptopoulos V. CT colonography of colorectal polyps: a metaanalysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1593–1598.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bielen D, Kiss G. Computer-aided detection for CT colonography: update 2007. Abdom Imaging 2007;32:571–581.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bogoni L, Cathier P, Dundar M, Jerebko A, Lakare S, Liang J, et al. Computer-aided detection (CAD) for CT colonography: a tool to address a growing need. Br J Radiol 2005;78(Spec. No. 1):S57–S62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Summers RM, Jerebko AK, Franaszek M, Malley JD, Johnson CD. Colonic polyps: complementary role of computer-aided detection in CT colonography. Radiology 2002; 225:391–399.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Soetikno R, Friedland S, Kaltenbach T, Chayama K, Tanaka S. Nonpolypoid (flat and depressed) colorectal neoplasms. Gastroenterology 2006;130:566–576.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Saitoh Y, Waxman I, West AB, Popnikolov NK, Gatalica Z, Watari J, et al. Prevalence and distinctive biologic features of flat colorectal adenomas in a North American population. Gastroenterology 2001;120:1657–1665.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rembacken BJ, Fujii T, Cairns A, Dixon MF, Yoshida S, Chalmers DM, et al. Flat and depressed colonic neoplasms: a prospective study of 1000 colonoscopies in the UK. Lancet 2000;355:1211–1214.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Park SH, Lee SS, Choi EK, Kim SY, Yang S-K, Kim JH, et al. Flat colorectal neoplasms: definition, importance, and visualization on CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:953–959.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum. General rules for clinical and pathological studies on cancer of the colon, rectum, and anus. 7th edition. Tokyo: Kanehara; 2006 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH. Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating (ROC) curves from continuously distributed data. Stat Med 1998;17:1033–1053.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fleiss, JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley; 1981. p. 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. ROC rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and cases with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol 1992;27:723–731.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy PC III, Barish MA, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1496–1503.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, Steinauer-Gebauer AM, Wall SD, McQuaid KR. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology 2001;219:685–692.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Pineau BC, Paskett ED, Chen GJ, Espeland MA, Phillips K, Han JP, et al. Virtual colonoscopy using oral contrast compared with colonoscopy for the detection of patients with colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2003;125:304–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2191–2200.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nicholson FB, Barro JL, Bartram CI, Dehmeshki J, Halligan S, Taylor S, et al. The role of CT colonography in colorectal cancer screening. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:2315–2323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bond JH. Progress in refining virtual colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. Gastroenterology 2005;129:2103–2106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mang T, Peloschek P, Plank C, Maier A, Graser A, Weber M, et al. Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography. Eur Radiol 2007;17:2598–2607.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Halligan S, Altman DG, Mallett S, Taylor SA, Burling D, Roddie M, et al. Computed tomographic colonography: assessment of radiologist performance with and without computer-aided detection. Gastroenterology 2006;131:1690–1699.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fidler JL, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, Hara AK, Harmsen WS. Detection of flat lesions in the colon with CT colonography. Abdom Imaging 2002;27:292–300.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Jensch S, van Gelder RE, Florie J, Thomassen-de Graaf MA, Lobé JV, Bossuyt PM, et al. Performance of radiographers in the evaluation of CT colonographic images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:W249–W255.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology CT Colonography Group Investigators. Effect of directed training on reader performance for CT colonography: multicenter study. Radiology 2007;242:152–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Park SH, Ha HK, Kim MJ, Kim KW, Kim AY, Yang DH, et al. False-negative results at multi-detector row CT colonography: multivariate analysis of causes for missed lesions. Radiology 2005;235:495–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim SH, Lee JM, Lee JG, Kim JH, Lefere PA, Han JK, et al. Computer-aided detection of colonic polyps at CT colonography using a Hessian matrix-based algorithm: preliminary study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:41–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Summers RM, Yao J, Pickhardt PJ, Franaszek M, Bitter I, Brickman D, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population. Gastroenterology 2005;129:1832–1844.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Graser A, Kolligs FT, Mang T, Schaefer C, Geisbüsch S, Reiser MF, et al. Computer-aided detection in CT colonography: initial clinical experience using a prototype system. Eur Radiol 2007;10:2608–2615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dehmeshki J, Halligan S, Taylor SA, Roddie ME, McQuillan J, Honeyfield L, et al. Computer assisted detection software for CT colonography: effect of sphericity filter on performance characteristics for patients with and without fecal tagging. Eur Radiol 2007;17:662–668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shiraishi J, Abe H, Engelmann R, Doi K. Effect of a high sensitivity in a computerized scheme for detecting extremely subtle solitary pulmonary nodules in chest radiographs: observer performance study. Acad Radiol 2003;10:1302–1311.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, Abraham L, Sickles EA, D’Orsi C, et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1399–1409.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, Morley S, Bassett P, Atkin W, et al. CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance. Eur Radiol 2004;14:1025–1033.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Newcombe RG. Improved confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions based on paired data. Stat Med 1998;17:2635–2650.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Soto JA, Barish MA, Yee J. Reader training in CT colonography: how much is enough? Radiology 2005;237:26–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kobayashi T, Xu XW, MacMahon H, Metz CE, Doi K. Effect of a computer-aided diagnosis scheme on radiologists’ performance in detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Radiology 1996;199:843–848.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Chakraborty DP, Winter LH. Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. Radiology 1990;174:873–881.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Metz CE. Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological ROC studies. Invest Radiol 1989;24:234–245.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki, 216-8511, Japan

    Tsuyoshi Morimoto & Yasuo Nakijima

  2. Division of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

    Gen Iinuma & Yasuaki Arai

  3. Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Junji Shiraishi

  4. Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan

    Noriyuki Moriyama

  5. Medicsight PLC, London, UK

    Gareth Beddoe

Authors
  1. Tsuyoshi Morimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gen Iinuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Junji Shiraishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yasuaki Arai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Noriyuki Moriyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gareth Beddoe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yasuo Nakijima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tsuyoshi Morimoto.

About this article

Cite this article

Morimoto, T., Iinuma, G., Shiraishi, J. et al. Computer-aided detection in computed tomography colonography: current status and problems with detection of early colorectal cancer. Radiat Med 26, 261–269 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-007-0224-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-007-0224-5

Key words

Search

Navigation