Autonomous Artificial Intelligence Versus AI Assisted Human Optical Diagnosis (CADx-Prosp)
Autonomous Artificial Intelligence Versus AI Assisted Human Optical Diagnosis of Colorectal Polyps
Computer-aided image-enhanced endoscopy can predict the nature of colorectal polyps with over 90% accuracy. This technology uses artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze video recordings of polyps, learning to make diagnoses in real-time. This means that doctors can get immediate predictions about small polyps during the procedure, reducing the need for separate pathology exams and saving costs, ultimately improving patient care.
Human and AI interactions are complex and a framework to reap synergistic effects CADx systems when used by humans to harness optimal performance needs to be established. AI solutions in medicine are usually developed to be used as assistive devices, however, then they rely on humans to correct AI errors. Optical polyp diagnosis is a complex task. Non experts usually achieve diagnostic accuracy in 70-80%. CADx systems have a similar diagnostic accuracy when used autonomously. Clinical evaluation of CADx systems showed that CADx assisted OD performs equally to the operator performance when using non CADx assisted OD. To harness a benefit of clinical CADx implementation we would have to find a way that synergies between human and CADx come into play to eliminate cases in which CADx assisted and/ or human OD results in low diagnostic accuracy and also addresses the problem of serrated polyp recognition.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Our study hypothesis is that for CADx implementation, instead of using the high/low confidence framework, identifying cases with suboptimal diagnostic accuracy could be facilitated through identifying cases in which CADx and endoscopist disagreed in their diagnosis. Eliminating such cases might separate out cases with low accuracy when using CADx assisted OD. Since endoscopists have a high sensitivity but low specificity for serrated polyp OD, this framework will also allow us to implement a strategy to adequately manage serrated polyps found in the cohort.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Daniel von Renteln, MD
- Phone Number: 30912 514 890-8000
- Email: daniel.von.renteln.med@ssss.gouv.qc.ca
Study Locations
-
-
Quebec
-
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
- Recruiting
- Ghislaine Ahoua
-
Contact:
- Daniel von Renteln, MD
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Indication for full colonoscopy.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Known inflammatory bowel disease
- Active colitis
- coagulopathy
- familial polyposis syndrome
- poor general health, defined as an American Society of Anesthesiologists class >3
- emergency colonoscopy
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Other: All participants
The endoscopist will make an optical diagnosis (OD) prediction for all small polyps (up to 10 mm) in white light (WL). Then, the endoscopist will make another OD prediction using image enhanced endoscopy (IEE) modes. After that, CADx will be activated in the IEE mode and a CADx prediction will be documented. Finally, after seeing the CADx prediction, the endoscopist will make a final prediction, which can agree or disagree with the autonomous CADx one. Polyps will be resected and sent to a pathology lab, where a pathologic diagnosis (blinded to the endoscopist's predictions) will be rendered. |
The CADx system will be used to predict the histopathology of the polyp detected. |
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Accuracy of optical diagnosis, for polyps 1-5mm, compared with an agreed upon CADx-assisted diagnosis
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
Accuracy of optical diagnosis, for polyps 1-5mm, compared with an agreed upon CADx-assisted diagnosis , when histopathology results are used as the reference |
up to 100 weeks
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Accuracy of optical diagnosis, for polyps 1-10mm, compared with an agreed upon CADx-assisted diagnosis
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
Accuracy of optical diagnosis, for polyps 1-10mm, compared with an agreed upon CADx-assisted diagnosis, when histopathology results are used as the reference |
up to 100 weeks
|
|
Test characteristics, including recall, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV), and particularly the NPV of rectosigmoid neoplastic polyps.
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
A ≥90% NPV will be used as a quality benchmark for a strategy to not resect such diminutive polyps. |
up to 100 weeks
|
|
Agreement of surveillance interval recommendations of AI-A and AI-H compared with the pathology-based recommendations
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
For surveillance interval assignment, the pathology results of concomitant polyps >5 mm (including multiple concomitant polyps of all sizes and histology) will be considered when calculating the surveillance interval recommendation. Surveillance recommendations will be based on the 2020 United States Multi Society Task Force Guidelines as is current standard of practice at our center. |
up to 100 weeks
|
|
Proportion of patients for whom an immediate surveillance recommendation can be directly provided for each approach, and how often histopathology-based polyp examination would have been avoided.
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
The potential cost-effectiveness of OD (either approaches) will be evaluated using the measured described above. |
up to 100 weeks
|
|
Variability of OD (AI-A and AI-H) across participating endoscopists.
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
Each participating endoscopist will conduct a similar number of optical diagnoses to assess endoscopist-related factors. |
up to 100 weeks
|
|
Cost-effectiveness of OD ((AI-A and AI-H)
Time Frame: up to 100 weeks
|
A cost-effectiveness model will be applied to better quantify costs and understand cost impact including key cost drivers when generalized to a broader screening population. |
up to 100 weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Daniel von Renteln, MD, University of Montreal Medical Center (CHUM)
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 2025-12306
- 2025 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.