Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

E-CLAIR: Efficiency and Cost-effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Based Diabetic Retinopathy Screening in Flanders (E-CLAIR)

20. Mai 2022 aktualisiert von: JulieJacob, Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven
To evaluate the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of an artificial intelligence based diabetic retinopathy screening program in Flanders

Studienübersicht

Detaillierte Beschreibung

The increase of diabetes patients is a 21st century global health challenge with a predicted 642 million people suffering from the disease by 2040. Diabetes mellitus is characterized by high blood sugar levels over a prolonged period of time. These uncontrolled blood sugar levels can damage the inner lining of blood vessels which on the long term causes microvascular complications that affect small blood vessels. Retinopathy is the most prevalent microvascular complication of diabetes and is caused by small blood vessel damage, and neural damage at the back layer of the eye, the retina.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of blindness and visual disability in the working population. According to a study of the Eye Diseases Prevalence Research group, 40% of adult diabetes patients in the United States have some degree of DR and 8% have vision-threatening forms of DR. In addition, the DR Barometer study indicated that many patients with diabetes do not have a regular appointment with ophthalmology for an eye examination. Risk of vision loss can be significantly decreased with annual retinal screening and detection of cases that need to be referred for follow-up and treatment. The best example showing the value of eye screening is from the United Kingdom (UK). As a result of an implementation of a nationwide screening program, DR is no longer the leading cause of irreversible blindness in the UK.

In Flanders, and in Belgium as a whole, no such well-organized, nationwide DR screening program is in place and the approach is more fragmented. Flemish guidelines for diabetes care recommend an annual visit to the ophthalmologist for all the diabetic patients who receive insulin therapy in order to check if they have DR. About 30% of the diabetics will be diagnosed for DR and 70% are disease free or in a very early stage that doesn't need further treatment. However, manual detection of DR performed by an occupied, scarce ophthalmologist is labor-intensive and expensive, causing long waiting times for the patient and possibly resulting in a lack of care when needed.

Given the extent of the diabetes population in Flanders it is self-evident that there are difficulties to screen all patients in a timely manner by ophthalmologists. Indeed, a large amount of diabetes type 2 patients do not follow the annual referral by their general practitioner (GP) and are therefore screened at a too late stage, resulting in high, avoidable costs for the patient and society. Even more, the screening of the diabetic patients by an ophthalmologist put a resource burden on our healthcare system. Task differentiation, where trained graders or GP's instead of ophthalmologists grade for referable DR, can offer a solution for the too long waiting times and the high cost. Nevertheless, manual grading of DR still is labor-intensive and costly. Even more, despite the implementation of nationwide screening programs for DR and their accompanying grading protocols, there is still substantial room for improvement in the accuracy of manual DR grading.

Recently, deep learning (DL), a form of artificial intelligence (AI), has been introduced for automated analysis of images. In a landmark paper, Gulshan and co-workers published on a deep learning algorithm with high sensitivity and specificity for detecting referable DR. This study paved the way for further developments in the field of deep learning for automated DR detection, resulting in DL models that achieve specialist-level accuracy in diagnosing DR severity. IDx, for example, obtained the first-ever FDA authorization for an AI diagnostic system in any field of medicine for DR detection.

Implementation of software for automated analysis is seen as a cost-effective solution to support decision-making in an eye screening program. In the study by Tufail et al. three different AI grading tools were retrospectively compared for their performance and cost-effectiveness in the DR screening program in the UK. In a follow-up study by Heydon et al. the most promising AI grading tool was prospectively evaluated for use in the UK screening program, demonstrating high sensitivity with a specificity that could halve the workload of the manual graders.

Despite recent research there is still an existing gap for AI to be implemented effectively and efficiently in DR screening programs. For example, the high false-positive rate of AI based results hamper the clinical workflow. Also important to note is that DL models cannot replace the breadth and contextual knowledge of human specialists. It is the case that even the most accurate models will still need to be implemented into an existing clinical workflow before they can improve patient care at all. Besides, the real-world uptake of AI applications is slow and this is partly due to a lack of convincing evidence of the economical impact.

Taken all together, renewal within diabetes care in Flanders, and more in particular further development of a more efficient DR screening pathway, is necessary to ensure that the accessibility and quality of diabetic eye care can be guaranteed at manageable costs. Flanders can undoubtedly benefit from a more efficient and cost-effective AI-assisted DR screening workflow that is at least as accurate as a human specialist. Note that the translation of study results abroad to the Flanders situation is limited. After all, one cannot simply assume that cost-effectiveness ratios from foreign economic evaluations also apply in the Flanders context. Meaning that policymakers cannot base their decisions on the possible introduction of preventive screening interventions in Flanders directly on foreign studies. These findings demonstrate the clear need to set up a specific research project in Flanders to evaluate the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of a tailor-made DR screening program in Flanders.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Voraussichtlich)

1200

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienkontakt

Studienorte

      • Antwerp, Belgien
        • Rekrutierung
        • ZNA
        • Kontakt:
          • Pieter Paul Schauwvlieghe
      • Antwerpen, Belgien
        • Rekrutierung
        • UZA
        • Kontakt:
          • Luc Van Os
      • Brugge, Belgien
        • Rekrutierung
        • AZ Sint Jan
        • Kontakt:
          • Eva Vanhonsebrouck
      • Turnhout, Belgien
        • Rekrutierung
        • AZ Turnhout
        • Kontakt:
          • Werner Dirven

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

18 Jahre und älter (Erwachsene, Älterer Erwachsener)

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Studienberechtigte Geschlechter

Alle

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Diagnosis of diabetes mellitus
  • Age > 18 years old
  • Patient is capable of giving informed consent
  • Fluent in written and oral Dutch, or interpreter present

Exclusion Criteria:

  • - History of treatment for diabetic retinopathy or diabetic macular edema (laser or intravitreal injections)
  • Participant is contraindicated for imaging by fundus imaging systems used in the study

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Diagnose
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Einzelgruppenzuweisung
  • Maskierung: Keine (Offenes Etikett)

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
Aktiver Komparator: current workflow in Flanders
patient visits ophthalmologist
examination by ophthalmologist
Aktiver Komparator: AI-only workflow
patient is imaged, images are interpreted by DR AI tool, only referrable cases identified by DR AI tool will visit ophthalmologist
a form of artificial intelligence (AI), has been introduced for automated analysis of images
Aktiver Komparator: AI-human workflow
patient is imaged, images are interpreted by DR AI tool, referrable cases identified by DR AI tool will be remotely graded by a human, only the high risk patients will visit ophthalmologist
referrable cases identified by DR AI tool will be remotely graded by a human

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
sensitivity
Zeitfenster: 6 months
To evaluate the efficiency of the use of AI in screening for DRP: sensitivity
6 months
specificity
Zeitfenster: 6 months
To evaluate the efficiency of the use of AI in screening for DRP: specificity
6 months
AUC
Zeitfenster: 6 months
To evaluate the efficiency of the use of AI in screening for DRP: AUC
6 months

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Maßnahmenbeschreibung
Zeitfenster
precision
Zeitfenster: 6 months
performance of three DR screening workflows: precision
6 months
decision tree model
Zeitfenster: 6 months
cost-effectiveness of three DR screening workflows: decision tree model
6 months
recall
Zeitfenster: 6 months
performance of three DR screening workflows : recall
6 months
F1 score
Zeitfenster: 6 months
performance of three DR screening workflows: F1 score
6 months
false positives and false negatives
Zeitfenster: 6 months
performance of three DR screening workflows: false positives and false negatives
6 months

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Ermittler

  • Hauptermittler: Julie Jacob, MD PhD, Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven

Publikationen und hilfreiche Links

Die Bereitstellung dieser Publikationen erfolgt freiwillig durch die für die Eingabe von Informationen über die Studie verantwortliche Person. Diese können sich auf alles beziehen, was mit dem Studium zu tun hat.

Allgemeine Veröffentlichungen

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)

17. Juni 2021

Primärer Abschluss (Voraussichtlich)

1. November 2022

Studienabschluss (Voraussichtlich)

1. Dezember 2022

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

1. Oktober 2021

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

20. Mai 2022

Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)

26. Mai 2022

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)

26. Mai 2022

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

20. Mai 2022

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Mai 2022

Mehr Informationen

Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie

Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)

Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?

NEIN

Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt

Nein

Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt

Nein

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Abonnieren