{"about":{"site":"https://codewithpapers.app","non_affiliation":"Code with Papers and Syntology are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Papers with Code, Meta, or the pwc-archive mirror.","licence":"CC BY-SA 4.0","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","attribution":"https://codewithpapers.app/attribution","modified":"archive material modified by Syntology; see the attribution page"},"url":"/paper/refining-focus-in-ai-for-lung-cancer","title":"Refining Focus in AI for Lung Cancer: Comparing Lesion-Centric and Chest-Region Models with Performance Insights from Internal and External Validation","arxiv_id":"2411.16823","date":"2024-11-25","proceeding":null,"authors":["Fakrul Islam Tushar"],"abstract":"Background: AI-based classification models are essential for improving lung cancer diagnosis. However, the relative performance of lesion-level versus chest-region models in internal and external datasets remains unclear. Purpose: This study evaluates the performance of lesion-level and chest-region models for lung cancer classification, comparing their effectiveness across internal Duke Lung Nodule Dataset 2024 (DLND24) and external (LUNA16, NLST) datasets, with a focus on subgroup analyses by demographics, histology, and imaging characteristics. Materials and Methods: Two AI models were trained: one using lesion-centric patches (64,64,64) and the other using chest-region patches (512,512,8). Internal validation was conducted on DLND24, while external validation utilized LUNA16 and NLST datasets. The models performances were assessed using AUC-ROC, with subgroup analyses for demographic, clinical, and imaging factors. Statistical comparisons were performed using DeLongs test. Gradient-based visualizations and probability distribution were further used for analysis. Results: The lesion-level model consistently outperformed the chest-region model across datasets. In internal validation, the lesion-level model achieved an AUC of 0.71(CI: 0.61-0.81), compared to 0.68(0.57-0.77) for the chest-region model. External validation showed similar trends, with AUCs of 0.90(0.87-0.92) and 0.81(0.79-0.82) on LUNA16 and NLST, respectively. Subgroup analyses revealed significant advantages for lesion-level models in certain histological subtypes (adenocarcinoma) and imaging conditions (CT manufacturers). Conclusion: Lesion-level models demonstrate superior classification performance, especially for external datasets and challenging subgroups, suggesting their clinical utility for precision lung cancer diagnostics.","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16823v1","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2411.16823v1.pdf","source":{"archive":"pwc-archive (Hugging Face), CC BY-SA 4.0","snapshot":"2025-07-28","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","row_kind":"abstracts"},"code_links":[{"paper_slug":"refining-focus-in-ai-for-lung-cancer","repo_url":"https://github.com/fitushar/AI-in-Lung-Health-Benchmarking-Detection-and-Diagnostic-Models-Across-Multiple-CT-Scan-Datasets","is_official":0,"mentioned_in_paper":0,"mentioned_in_github":1,"framework":"pytorch","reach":{"status":"ok","spdx":"NOASSERTION"}}],"tasks":[{"task_slug":"cancer-classification","task_name":"Cancer Classification"},{"task_slug":"lung-cancer-diagnosis","task_name":"Lung Cancer Diagnosis"}],"methods":[{"method_slug":"focus","method_name":"Focus"}],"datasets_introduced":[],"methods_introduced":[],"results":[],"syntology":{"syntology_url":null,"atlas_url":null,"mcp":null,"developers":"https://syntology.ai/developers"},"arxiv_metadata":null,"syntology_extracted_results":null}