Ethical Considerations and Fairness in the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Neuroradiology

In this review, concepts of algorithmic bias and fairness are defined qualitatively and mathematically. Illustrative examples are given of what can go wrong when unintended bias or unfairness in algorithmic development occurs. The importance of explainability, accountability, and transparency with respect to artificial intelligence algorithm development and clinical deployment is discussed. These are grounded in the concept of "primum no nocere" (first, do no harm). Steps to mitigate unfairness and bias in task definition, data collection, model definition, training, testing, deployment, and feedback are provided. Discussions on the implementation of fairness criteria that maximize benefit and minimize unfairness and harm to neuroradiology patients will be provided, including suggestions for neuroradiologists to consider as artificial intelligence algorithms gain acceptance into neuroradiology practice and become incorporated into routine clinical workflow.

Quantifying T2-FLAIR Mismatch Using Geographically Weighted Regression and Predicting Molecular Status in Lower-Grade Gliomas

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The T2-FLAIR mismatch sign is a validated imaging sign of isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant 1p/19q noncodeleted gliomas. It is identified by radiologists through visual inspection of preoperative MR imaging scans and has been shown to identify isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant 1p/19q noncodeleted gliomas with a high positive predictive value. We have developed an approach to quantify the T2-FLAIR mismatch signature and use it to predict the molecular status of lower-grade gliomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used multiparametric MR imaging scans and segmentation labels of 108 preoperative lower-grade glioma tumors from The Cancer Imaging Archive. Clinical information and T2-FLAIR mismatch sign labels were obtained from supplementary material of relevant publications. We adopted an objective analytic approach to estimate this sign through a geographically weighted regression and used the residuals for each case to construct a probability density function (serving as a residual signature). These functions were then analyzed using an appropriate statistical framework.

RESULTS

We observed statistically significant (P value = .05) differences between the averages of residual signatures for an isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant 1p/19q noncodeleted class of tumors versus other categories. Our classifier predicts these cases with area under the curve of 0.98 and high specificity and sensitivity. It also predicts the T2-FLAIR mismatch sign within these cases with an under the curve of 0.93.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of this retrospective study, we show that geographically weighted regression-based residual signatures are highly informative of the T2-FLAIR mismatch sign and can identify isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutation and 1p/19q codeletion status with high predictive power. The utility of the proposed quantification of the T2-FLAIR mismatch sign can be potentially validated through a prospective multi-institutional study.

Standardization in Quantitative Imaging: A Multicenter Comparison of Radiomic Features from Different Software Packages on Digital Reference Objects and Patient Data Sets

Radiomic features are being increasingly studied for clinical applications. We aimed to assess the agreement among radiomic features when computed by several groups by using different software packages under very tightly controlled conditions, which included standardized feature definitions and common image data sets. Ten sites (9 from the NCI's Quantitative Imaging Network] positron emission tomography–computed tomography working group plus one site from outside that group) participated in this project. Nine common quantitative imaging features were selected for comparison including features that describe morphology, intensity, shape, and texture. The common image data sets were: three 3D digital reference objects (DROs) and 10 patient image scans from the Lung Image Database Consortium data set using a specific lesion in each scan. Each object (DRO or lesion) was accompanied by an already-defined volume of interest, from which the features were calculated. Feature values for each object (DRO or lesion) were reported. The coefficient of variation (CV), expressed as a percentage, was calculated across software packages for each feature on each object. Thirteen sets of results were obtained for the DROs and patient data sets. Five of the 9 features showed excellent agreement with CV < 1%; 1 feature had moderate agreement (CV < 10%), and 3 features had larger variations (CV ≥ 10%) even after attempts at harmonization of feature calculations. This work highlights the value of feature definition standardization as well as the need to further clarify definitions for some features.