TY - JOUR A1 - Arribas, Julia A1 - Antonelli, Giulio A1 - Frazzoni, Leonardo A1 - Fuccio, Lorenzo A1 - Ebigbo, Alanna A1 - van der Sommen, Fons A1 - Ghatwary, Noha A1 - Palm, Christoph A1 - Coimbra, Miguel A1 - Renna, Francesco A1 - Bergman, Jacques J.G.H.M. A1 - Sharma, Prateek A1 - Messmann, Helmut A1 - Hassan, Cesare A1 - Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario J. T1 - Standalone performance of artificial intelligence for upper GI neoplasia: a meta-analysis JF - Gut N2 - Objective: Artificial intelligence (AI) may reduce underdiagnosed or overlooked upper GI (UGI) neoplastic and preneoplastic conditions, due to subtle appearance and low disease prevalence. Only disease-specific AI performances have been reported, generating uncertainty on its clinical value. Design: We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus until July 2020, for studies on the diagnostic performance of AI in detection and characterisation of UGI lesions. Primary outcomes were pooled diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of AI. Secondary outcomes were pooled positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values. We calculated pooled proportion rates (%), designed summary receiving operating characteristic curves with respective area under the curves (AUCs) and performed metaregression and sensitivity analysis. Results: Overall, 19 studies on detection of oesophageal squamous cell neoplasia (ESCN) or Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia (BERN) or gastric adenocarcinoma (GCA) were included with 218, 445, 453 patients and 7976, 2340, 13 562 images, respectively. AI-sensitivity/specificity/PPV/NPV/positive likelihood ratio/negative likelihood ratio for UGI neoplasia detection were 90% (CI 85% to 94%)/89% (CI 85% to 92%)/87% (CI 83% to 91%)/91% (CI 87% to 94%)/8.2 (CI 5.7 to 11.7)/0.111 (CI 0.071 to 0.175), respectively, with an overall AUC of 0.95 (CI 0.93 to 0.97). No difference in AI performance across ESCN, BERN and GCA was found, AUC being 0.94 (CI 0.52 to 0.99), 0.96 (CI 0.95 to 0.98), 0.93 (CI 0.83 to 0.99), respectively. Overall, study quality was low, with high risk of selection bias. No significant publication bias was found. Conclusion: We found a high overall AI accuracy for the diagnosis of any neoplastic lesion of the UGI tract that was independent of the underlying condition. This may be expected to substantially reduce the miss rate of precancerous lesions and early cancer when implemented in clinical practice. KW - Artificial Intelligence Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321922 VL - 70 IS - 8 SP - 1458 EP - 1468 PB - BMJ CY - London ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Ebigbo, Alanna A1 - Mendel, Robert A1 - Rückert, Tobias A1 - Schuster, Laurin A1 - Probst, Andreas A1 - Manzeneder, Johannes A1 - Prinz, Friederike A1 - Mende, Matthias A1 - Steinbrück, Ingo A1 - Faiss, Siegbert A1 - Rauber, David A1 - Souza Jr., Luis Antonio de A1 - Papa, João Paulo A1 - Deprez, Pierre A1 - Oyama, Tsuneo A1 - Takahashi, Akiko A1 - Seewald, Stefan A1 - Sharma, Prateek A1 - Byrne, Michael F. A1 - Palm, Christoph A1 - Messmann, Helmut T1 - Endoscopic prediction of submucosal invasion in Barrett’s cancer with the use of Artificial Intelligence: A pilot Study JF - Endoscopy N2 - Background and aims: The accurate differentiation between T1a and T1b Barrett’s cancer has both therapeutic and prognostic implications but is challenging even for experienced physicians. We trained an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system on the basis of deep artificial neural networks (deep learning) to differentiate between T1a and T1b Barrett’s cancer white-light images. Methods: Endoscopic images from three tertiary care centres in Germany were collected retrospectively. A deep learning system was trained and tested using the principles of cross-validation. A total of 230 white-light endoscopic images (108 T1a and 122 T1b) was evaluated with the AI-system. For comparison, the images were also classified by experts specialized in endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of Barrett’s cancer. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, F1 and accuracy of the AI-system in the differentiation between T1a and T1b cancer lesions was 0.77, 0.64, 0.73 and 0.71, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the performance of the AI-system and that of human experts with sensitivity, specificity, F1 and accuracy of 0.63, 0.78, 0.67 and 0.70 respectively. Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrates the first multicenter application of an AI-based system in the prediction of submucosal invasion in endoscopic images of Barrett’s cancer. AI scored equal to international experts in the field, but more work is necessary to improve the system and apply it to video sequences and in a real-life setting. Nevertheless, the correct prediction of submucosal invasion in Barret´s cancer remains challenging for both experts and AI. KW - Maschinelles Lernen KW - Neuronales Netz KW - Speiseröhrenkrebs KW - Diagnose KW - Artificial Intelligence KW - Machine learning KW - Adenocarcinoma KW - Barrett’s cancer KW - submucosal invasion Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1311-8570 VL - 53 IS - 09 SP - 878 EP - 883 PB - Thieme CY - Stuttgart ER -