Performance of chest CT-based artificial intelligence models in distinguishing pulmonary mucormycosis, invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, and pulmonary tuberculosis

In clinical practice, differentiating among pulmonary mucormycosis (PM), invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA), and pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) can be challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of chest CT-based artificial intelligence (AI) models in distinguishing among these three diseases. Patients with confirmed PM, IPA, or PTB were retrospectively recruited from three tertiary hospitals. Two models were developed: unanotated supervised training (UST) model trained with original CT images and annotated supervised training (AST) model trained with manually annotated lesion images. A network questionnaire with 20 cases was designed to assess the performance of clinicians. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for both models and clinicians. A total of 61 PM cases, 136 IPA cases, and 155 PTB cases were included in the study. In the internal validation set, both models had an accuracy of 66.1%. The UST model had sensitivities of 27.3%, 73.9%, and 76.0% for PM, IPA, and PTB, while AST model had sensitivities of 9.1%, 69.6%, and 88.0% for the same conditions. In the external validation set, both models had an accuracy of 57.6%. The UST model had sensitivities of 0, 85.7%, and 53.3% for PM, IPA, and PTB, respectively, while AST model had sensitivities of 0, 42.9% and 83.3%. 112 clinicians had an accuracy of 42.9%, with sensitivities of 31.5%, 43.4%, and 48.0% for PM, IPA, and PTB. We demonstrated that two AI models showed comparable performance in diagnosing three diseases. Both models achieved acceptable sensitivity in detecting IPA and PTB, but had low sensitivity in identifying PM.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Mycology
Published
2024-12-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myae123
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.62

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Performance of chest CT-based artificial intelligence models in distinguishing pulmonary mucormycosis, invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, and pulmonary tuberculosis

Chengbao Peng, Lunfang Tan, Jinping Zheng, Shuyi Liu et al.
4 citations
Medical Mycology
Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
1.62
article

Performance of chest CT-based artificial intelligence models in distinguishing pulmonary mucormycosis, invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, and pulmonary tuberculosis

Chengbao Peng, Lunfang Tan, Jinping Zheng, Shuyi Liu, Deyan Chen, Fan Yang, Lina Liang, Yun Li, Feng Ye, Xia Zhang, Youwen Zhang, Yuyan Li, Guodong Hu, Huai Chen
article en
4 citations

Abstract

In clinical practice, differentiating among pulmonary mucormycosis (PM), invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA), and pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) can be challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of chest CT-based artificial intelligence (AI) models in distinguishing among these three diseases. Patients with confirmed PM, IPA, or PTB were retrospectively recruited from three tertiary hospitals. Two models were developed: unanotated supervised training (UST) model trained with original CT images and annotated supervised training (AST) model trained with manually annotated lesion images. A network questionnaire with 20 cases was designed to assess the performance of clinicians. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for both models and clinicians. A total of 61 PM cases, 136 IPA cases, and 155 PTB cases were included in the study. In the internal validation set, both models had an accuracy of 66.1%. The UST model had sensitivities of 27.3%, 73.9%, and 76.0% for PM, IPA, and PTB, while AST model had sensitivities of 9.1%, 69.6%, and 88.0% for the same conditions. In the external validation set, both models had an accuracy of 57.6%. The UST model had sensitivities of 0, 85.7%, and 53.3% for PM, IPA, and PTB, respectively, while AST model had sensitivities of 0, 42.9% and 83.3%. 112 clinicians had an accuracy of 42.9%, with sensitivities of 31.5%, 43.4%, and 48.0% for PM, IPA, and PTB. We demonstrated that two AI models showed comparable performance in diagnosing three diseases. Both models achieved acceptable sensitivity in detecting IPA and PTB, but had low sensitivity in identifying PM.

Medical MycologyVol. 63(1)
Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University (CN), Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University (CN), First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University (CN), National Clinical Research (US), Neusoft (China) (CN), Intelligent Health (United Kingdom) (GB), State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease (CN), Gaozhou People's Hospital (CN), Southern Medical University (CN), Guangzhou Medical University (CN)
Guangzhou Municipal Science and Technology Project, National Key Research and Development Program of China
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
1.62
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.