QIBA CT Volumetrics Group 1B: (Patient Image Datasets)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Properties of Least Squares Regression Coefficients
Advertisements

The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) Data Collection Process This presentation based on the RSNA 2004 InfoRAD theater presentation titled “The Lung.
Vision and Image Analysis Group (VIA) Anthony P. Reeves School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Cornell University © A. P. Reeves 2007.
Science Coursework - ISAs
Chapter 7 Statistical Data Treatment and Evaluation
Evaluation of segmentation. Example Reference standard & segmentation.
Chap 8-1 Statistics for Business and Economics, 6e © 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 8 Estimation: Single Population Statistics for Business and Economics.
G. Alonso, D. Kossmann Systems Group
Seeram Chapter 13: Single Slice Spiral - Helical CT
L.M. McMillin NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Regression Retrieval Overview Larry McMillin Climate Research and Applications Division National Environmental Satellite,
PET/CT Working Group Update Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer Sandy Napel.
Volumetric Measurement of Tumors David F. Yankelevitz, MD.
A study on the effect of imaging acquisition parameters on lung nodule image interpretation Presenters: Shirley Yu (University of Southern California)
An Investigation into the Relationship between Semantic and Content Based Similarity Using LIDC Grace Dasovich Robert Kim Midterm Presentation August 21.
Chapter 8 Estimation: Single Population
Overview of STAT 270 Ch 1-9 of Devore + Various Applications.
Bootstrapping LING 572 Fei Xia 1/31/06.
Lecture 16 – Thurs, Oct. 30 Inference for Regression (Sections ): –Hypothesis Tests and Confidence Intervals for Intercept and Slope –Confidence.
Chapter 7 Estimation: Single Population
Ch. 3.1 – Measurements and Their Uncertainty
STAT 4060 Design and Analysis of Surveys Exam: 60% Mid Test: 20% Mini Project: 10% Continuous assessment: 10%
Applications in GIS (Kriging Interpolation)
SPIE Medical Imaging Conference Lung Imaging Database Consortium (LIDC) LIDC Data Elements and Data Collection Process February 13, 2005.
Measurement System Analysis Kevin B. Craner Boise State University October 6, 2003.
© ABSL Power Solutions 2007 © STM Quality Limited STM Quality Limited Measurement Systems Analysis TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT M.S.A.
Understanding Research Results
CT Quality Control for CT Scanners. Quality Control in CT A good idea? Yes Required for accreditation? Sometimes Improves image quality? Sometimes Depends.
QIBA CT Volumetrics - Cross-Platform Study (Group 1C) May 6, 2009 Interclinic Comparison of CT Volumetry Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance.
Estimation of Demand Prof. Ravikesh Srivastava Lecture-8.
Chapter 7 Estimation: Single Population
PGCC CHM 1030 Sinex/Gage Three archers each with three arrows to shoot. Can you hit the bull's-eye? Both accurate and precise Precise but not accurate.
Update on Lung Cancer Image Processing Rick Avila Karthik Krishnan Luis Ibanez Kitware, Inc. April 19, 2006.
QIBA CT Volumetrics - Cross-Platform Study (Group 1C) December 23, 2009 CT Cross-platform Sizing of Phantom Lesions Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance.
Error Analysis Accuracy Closeness to the true value Measurement Accuracy – determines the closeness of the measured value to the true value Instrument.
Slide - 1 Confidential. Slide - 2 Confidential Slide - 3 Confidential Interalgorithm Study using CT Images of synthetic nodules……….
Chap 20-1 Statistics for Business and Economics, 6e © 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 20 Sampling: Additional Topics in Sampling Statistics for Business.
PROBABILITY (6MTCOAE205) Chapter 6 Estimation. Confidence Intervals Contents of this chapter: Confidence Intervals for the Population Mean, μ when Population.
How to Teach Statistics in EBM Rafael Perera. Basic teaching advice Know your audience Know your audience! Create a knowledge gap Give a map of the main.
Success depends upon the ability to measure performance. Rule #1:A process is only as good as the ability to reliably measure.
COMBI RECIST 1.1 February Target Lesions: Selection at Baseline Perform baseline evaluations as close to treatment start as possible (no more than.
1 Inter-observer Agreement of The Response To Therapy AssessmentInter-observer Agreement of The Response To Therapy Assessment in Advanced Lung Cancer.
L Berkley Davis Copyright 2009 MER301: Engineering Reliability Lecture 16 1 MER301: Engineering Reliability LECTURE 16: Measurement System Analysis and.
S Demehri 1, M.K Kalra 2, M.L Steigner 1, F.J Rybicki 1, M.J. Lang, 3, S.G Silverman 1. 1.Department of Radiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard.
QIBA CT Volumetrics - Cross-Platform Study (Group 1C) September 2, 2009 Interclinical Comparison of CT Volumetry Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance.
Brian Macpherson Ph.D, Professor of Statistics, University of Manitoba Tom Bingham Statistician, The Boeing Company.
QIBA CT Volumetrics Group 1B: (Patient Image Datasets) Update April 19, 2011.
Slide - 1 Confidential 3A Group Dr Maria Athelogou Grace Kim: Clarification in the study design: Since we have contours of lesions from many readers (for.
QIBA CT Volumetrics - Cross-Platform Study (Group 1C) March 18, 2009 Interclinic Comparison of CT Volumetry Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance.
Lecture I Sensors.
QIBA CT Volumetrics Group 1B: (Patient Image Datasets) Teleconference Nov 5, 2008.
N Petrick RSNA QIBA Phantom Group November 13, QIBA Proposed Phase 1A Project V5.0 QIBA Phantom Subgroup.
1 OUTPUT ANALYSIS FOR SIMULATIONS. 2 Introduction Analysis of One System Terminating vs. Steady-State Simulations Analysis of Terminating Simulations.
1 Exercise 7: Accuracy and precision. 2 Origin of the error : Accuracy and precision Systematic (not random) –bias –impossible to be corrected  accuracy.
Measurement and Error PGCC CHM 103 Sinex In small groups... Each group must invent a new unit of measurement Use the new unit to determine the area of.
The PET/CT Working Group: CT Segmentation Challenge Informatics Issues Multi-site algorithm comparison Task: CT-based lung nodule segmentation.
Accuracy, Reliability, and Validity of Freesurfer Measurements David H. Salat
Uncertainty and error in measurement
Statistics for Business and Economics 8 th Edition Chapter 7 Estimation: Single Population Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice.
Statistical Concepts Basic Principles An Overview of Today’s Class What: Inductive inference on characterizing a population Why : How will doing this allow.
WELCOME TO BIOSTATISTICS! WELCOME TO BIOSTATISTICS! Course content.
Fundamentals of Data Analysis Lecture 11 Methods of parametric estimation.
Statistics for Business and Economics 7 th Edition Chapter 7 Estimation: Single Population Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice.
M. Kuhn, P. Hopchev, M. Ferro-Luzzi
Fundamentals of regression analysis
Gage R&R Estimating measurement components
Introduction to Instrumentation Engineering
QIBA Datasets: 2D Slice Images
Error Analysis.
Lecture 1: Descriptive Statistics and Exploratory
Presentation transcript:

QIBA CT Volumetrics Group 1B: (Patient Image Datasets)

Charge 1. To agree on questions to be answered by these Reference Datasets 2. To identify requirements for those datasets, based on questions to be answered 3. To identify existing datasets that can be leveraged to provide desired datasets

Questions (overview) 1. What level of accuracy and precision can be achieved in measuring tumor volumes in patient datasets? 2. What level of reproducibility in estimating change can be achieved when measuring tumors in phantom datasets? 3. What is the minimum detectable level of change that can be achieved when measuring tumors in patient datasets under a “No Change” condition? 4. What level of reproducibility in estimating change can be achieved in measuring tumors in patient datasets with “Unknown Change” condition? 5. What is the effect of slice thickness on estimating change in tumors using patient datasets?

Initially Agreed to First Pursue: 1. What level of accuracy and precision can be achieved in measuring tumor volumes in patient datasets? 2. What level of reproducibility in estimating change can be achieved when measuring tumors in phantom datasets? 3. What is the minimum detectable level of change that can be achieved when measuring tumors in patient datasets under a “No Change” condition? 4. What level of reproducibility in estimating change can be achieved in measuring tumors in patient datasets with “Unknown Change” condition? 5. What is the effect of slice thickness on estimating change in tumors using patient datasets?

Next Steps  Define requirements and Design Experiments for these two questions

Question 1 – Accuracy and Precision (aka Bias and Variance) in measuring tumor volumes 1. Specific Aims (a) Investigate both bias and variance of both readers and algorithm-assisted readers in measuring volumes, diameters and bi-directional diameters of lesions (b) Investigate inter-observer variability in each task (c) Investigate Intra-observer variability in each task ??? (NOTE: here observer should be interpreted broadly – as reader measuring manually for diameters as well as algorithm-assisted reader measuring contours).

Question 1 – Accuracy and Precision (aka Bias and Variance) in measuring tumor volumes 1. METHODS and MATERIALS  LIDC dataset  lesions with “known size” will be used (size based on contours from 4 LIDC readers)  Each lesion will have boundaries  Only a single time point is needed (no followup needed, no diagnosis needed)  Need to identify which nodules to use – criteria?

Question 1 – Accuracy and Precision (aka Bias and Variance) in measuring tumor volumes 1. METHODS and MATERIALS  Like NIST Biochange 2008, lesions are identified and coordinates provided to readers.  Reader tasks Manually mark 2 Diameters (w/o LIDC marks) Manually mark 2 Diameters (w/o LIDC marks) Longest diameter and perpendicular diameterLongest diameter and perpendicular diameter Also semiautomated contour of lesion Also semiautomated contour of lesion From contour, determine volume, longest diameter and diameter perpendicular to longest diameterFrom contour, determine volume, longest diameter and diameter perpendicular to longest diameter Have readers perform some cases > 1 (intra reader variation) Have readers perform some cases > 1 (intra reader variation)

Data Collected Nodule # coords LIDC vol LIDC Longest Diam LIDC Perp Diam R1 vol R1 LD from cont our R1 PD from conto ur R1 LD R1 PD R2 vol

Question 1 – Accuracy and Precision (aka Bias and Variance) in measuring tumor volumes 1. METHODS and MATERIALS  Analyses LIDC would be considered “truth” LIDC would be considered “truth” Estimate bias of each reader Estimate bias of each reader VolumeVolume Diam (manual and Assisted)Diam (manual and Assisted) Product of diameters (LD x PD) (Manual and assisted)Product of diameters (LD x PD) (Manual and assisted) Estimate inter-reader variability Estimate inter-reader variability Reader vs. “gold standard”Reader vs. “gold standard” Reader vs. readerReader vs. reader Intra-reader variability Intra-reader variability

Question 1 – Accuracy and Precision (aka Bias and Variance) in measuring tumor volumes 1. Questions 1. How many cases? 2. How many readers? 3. Case composition (all spherical? Some spiculated? Range of sizes?) 4. Enough of each subgroup to perform a stat. sign analysis? 1.(reader bias on spherical nodules is XX; 2.(reader bias on spiculated nodules is YY) 5. Do we want to do both size and shape subgroup analyses?

Questions

Question 2 – What is the min detectable level of change in patient datasets under a “No Change” condition? 1. Specific Aims (a) For patient datasets acquired over a very short time interval (presumably the “no change” condition”) investigate variance of both readers and algorithm-assisted readers in measuring change in volume, diameter and bi-directional diameters of lesions (here, the expected value of the change should be zero) (b) Investigate several change metrics such as: (a)Absolute value of change (b)fractional change in volume/diameter (c)Categorical variables (progression, regression, etc.)?? (c) Investigate inter-observer variability in each task (d) Investigate Intra-observer variability in each task ??? (NOTE: again, observer should be interpreted broadly – as reader measuring manually for diameters as well as algorithm-assisted reader measuring contours).

Existing Resources  RIDER – MSK Coffee Break Experiment (No Change Condition) 32 NSCLC patients 32 NSCLC patients Imaged twice on the same scanner w/in 15 minutes Imaged twice on the same scanner w/in 15 minutes Thin section (1.25 mm) images Thin section (1.25 mm) images Manual linear measurements performed by 3 readers; volume obtained from algorithm. Manual linear measurements performed by 3 readers; volume obtained from algorithm.

Questions 1. METHODS and MATERIALS  MSK Coffee break experiment patient datasets Repeat scan of lesions over short time interval --- “No change” condition Repeat scan of lesions over short time interval --- “No change” condition True size is unknown True size is unknown

Questions 1. METHODS and MATERIALS  Like NIST Biochange 2008, lesions are identified and coordinates provided to readers.  Reader tasks For each lesion, manually mark 2 Diameters For each lesion, manually mark 2 Diameters Longest diameter and perpendicular diameterLongest diameter and perpendicular diameter Also each reader obtains a semiautomated contour of entire volume of lesion Also each reader obtains a semiautomated contour of entire volume of lesion From contour, determine volume, longest diameter and diameter perpendicular to longest diameterFrom contour, determine volume, longest diameter and diameter perpendicular to longest diameter Keep actual contour coordinates/mask (TBD)Keep actual contour coordinates/mask (TBD) Randomize order of cases so reader does not simultaneously review both scans of a patient (does not see both scans of same lesion); has to contour them independently. Randomize order of cases so reader does not simultaneously review both scans of a patient (does not see both scans of same lesion); has to contour them independently.

Data Collected QIBA Patient ID # Scan# Nodule # coords R1 vol R1 LD from contour R1 PD from contour R1 LD manual R1 PD manual R2 vol 111 (320,267, 52) (310, 248, 48) (221,335, 13) (215, 340, 15) 28

Question 1 – Accuracy and Precision (aka Bias and Variance) in measuring tumor volumes 1. METHODS and MATERIALS  Analyses Estimate variance of different change metrics for Estimate variance of different change metrics for VolumeVolume Diam (manual and Assisted)Diam (manual and Assisted) Product of diameters (LD x PD) (Manual and assisted)Product of diameters (LD x PD) (Manual and assisted) Estimate inter-reader variability Estimate inter-reader variability Intra-reader variability ?? (can we do that with data we would have? Or would we have to specifically introduce the exact same cases multiple times?) Intra-reader variability ?? (can we do that with data we would have? Or would we have to specifically introduce the exact same cases multiple times?)

Questions to be Pursued in a Future Phase

Questions 2. What level of reproducibility in estimating change can be achieved in measuring tumors in phantom datasets? (a) RECIST change vs. volume change (b) Investigate just variance (not bias)? (c) inter-observer variability (d) Intra-observer variability (e) Change metric – absolute value? fractional change in volume/diameter? categorical variable? For this question:  Variety of lesions with known size  Compare “size” of different lesions somehow (TBD) Use different existing lesions and treat them as though they were the same lesion at different time points. Use different existing lesions and treat them as though they were the same lesion at different time points. Physically alter lesions over time and scan at both time points (Bob Ford’s water balloon experiment) Physically alter lesions over time and scan at both time points (Bob Ford’s water balloon experiment)

Questions 4. What level of reproducibility in estimating change can be achieved in measuring tumors in patient datasets with “Unknown Change” condition? (a) RECIST change vs. volume change (b) Investigate just variance? (c) inter-observer variability (d) Intra-observer variability (would be good to have more than 2 time points; may not exist in RIDER). (e) Change metric – absolute value? fractional change in volume/diameter? categorical variable? (f) Look at effects of lesion size for a specific (thin) slice thickness For this question:  Variety of lesions (true size may be unknown)  Patient datasets with same lesions at different time points.  Lesions may or may not have changed size – change is unknown.  RIDER datasets – unannotated as of yet. We have identified about 20 lesions of various sizes. Possible cases from RadPharm.

Questions 5. What is the effect of slice thickness on estimating change in tumors using patient datasets? (a) RECIST change vs. volume change (b) Investigate just variance? (c) inter-observer variability (d) Intra-observer variability (e) Change metric – absolute value? fractional change in volume/diameter? categorical variable? (f) Look at interactions between slice thickness and lesion size (and other lesion characteristics such as shape, margin, etc.) For this question:  Also Variety of lesions (true size may be unknown)  Patient datasets with same lesions at different time points, all done originally with thin slices; create a thick slice series (average together adjacent images).  Lesions may or may not have changed size – change is unknown.  Estimate change on thin and thick series and compare  Thin Slice RIDER datasets that can be fused together. Other cases from RadPharm?