摘要
一位新闻记者兼机器人与机器学习的工作人员新闻编辑每日新闻-人工智能的新研究是一篇报道的主题。根据NewsRx记者来自瑞典斯托克霍尔姆的新闻报道，研究表明，“基于图像的人工智能(AI)方法在前列腺癌(PCa)检测中显示出很高的准确性。与人类病理学家相比，它们对患者结局和成本效益的影响仍然未知。”我们的新闻编辑从卡罗林斯卡研究所的研究中获得了一句话：“我们的目的是评估瑞典人工智能辅助病理诊断PCa的有效性和成本效益。我们从医疗保健的角度对50至74岁的男性进行了四年一次的前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)筛查。PSA为3ng/ml的男性被推荐进行标准活检(SBx)，通过人工智能检查核心，然后由病理学家检查AI标记的阳性核心，或者由病理学家单独检查。使用内部STHLM3验证数据集估计AI绩效特征。结果测量包括测试次数、PCa发生率和死亡率、过度诊断、质量调整寿命年(QALYs)、与单独的病理学家相比，人工智能辅助的工作流程使PSA测试、SBx PR和PCa死亡的数量增加了0.03%。AI可使病理学家评估活检核心的比例降低80%，每个病例的成本为0欧元，与单独的病理学家相比，AI辅助的工作流程成本更低，QALYs<0.001%，结果对AI成本敏感，根据我们的模型，AI辅助的病理学将显著减轻病理学家的工作量。不会影响患者的生活质量，我们比较了瑞典前列腺癌患者的结果和评估前列腺活检的两种方法的相关成本：(1)人工智能(A I)技术和人类病理学家对阳性活检的审查；(2)仅由人类病理学家进行所有活检。并且节省资金，而且与单独的人类病理学家相比不会影响患者的结果。
Abstract
By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Robotics & Machine Learning Daily News Daily News – New research on Artificial Intelligenc e is the subject of a report. According to news reporting originating from Stock holm, Sweden, by NewsRx correspondents, research stated, “Image-based artificial intelligence (AI) methods have shown high accuracy in prostate cancer (PCa) det ection. Their impact on patient outcomes and cost effectiveness in comparison to human pathologists remains unknown.” Our news editors obtained a quote from the research from Karolinska Institute, “ Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of AI-assisted pathology for PCa diagnosis in Sweden. We modeled quadrennial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for men between the ages of 50 and 74 yr over a lifetime horizon using a health care perspective. Men with PSA 3 ng/ml were referred for standard biopsy (SBx), for which cores were either examined via AI followed by a pathologist for AI-labeled positive cores, or a pathologist alone. The AI perf ormance characteristics were estimated using an internal STHLM3 validation data set. Outcome measures included the number of tests, PCa incidence and mortality, overdiagnosis, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the potential reduction in pathologist-evaluated biopsy cores if AI were used. Cost-effectiveness was a ssessed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. In comparison to a patho logist alone, the AI-assisted workflow increased the number of PSA tests, SBx pr ocedures, and PCa deaths by 0.03%, and slightly reduced PCa inciden ce and overdiagnosis. AI would reduce the proportion of biopsy cores evaluated b y a pathologist by 80%. At a cost of €0 per case, the AI-assisted workflow would cost less and result in <0.001% lower QALYs in comparison to a pathologist alone. The results were sensitive to the AI cost. According to our model, AI-assisted pathology would significantly d ecrease the workload of pathologists, would not affect patient quality of life, and would yield cost savings in Sweden when compared to a human pathologist alon e. We compared outcomes for prostate cancer patients and relevant costs for two methods of assessing prostate biopsies in Sweden: (1) artificial intelligence (A I) technology and review of positive biopsies by a human pathologist; and (2) a human pathologist alone for all biopsies. We found that addition of AI would red uce the pathology workload and save money, and would not affect patient outcomes when compared to a human pathologist alone.”
NETL
NSTL