Back to Authors

Fan, Yong

0000-0001-9869-4685

Mayo Clinic

University of Pennsylvania

Citations 2

Validation of an Automated CT Image Analysis in the Prevention of Urinary Stones with Hydration Trial
Tasian, Gregory E., Harper, Jonathan D. , Sivalingam, Sri , Logan, Joey, Al‐Khalidi, Hussein R. , Lieske, John C., Selman-Fermin, Antoine, Desai, Alana , Lai, H. Henry , Kırkalı, Ziya , Scales, Charles D , Tasian, Gregory E. , Tasian, Gregory E., Maalouf, Naim M. , Lieske, John C. , Scales, Charles D. , Fan, Yong

Journal of Endourology | August 26, 2025 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 953-959

10.1089/end.2024.0582 Get It

Introduction and Objective: Kidney stone growth and new stone formation are common clinical trial endpoints and are associated with future symptomatic events. To date, a manual review of CT scans has been required to assess stone growth and new stone formation, which is laborious. We validated the performance of a software algorithm that automatically identified, registered, and measured stones over longitudinal CT studies. Methods: We validated the performance of a pretrained machine learning algorithm to classify stone outcomes on longitudinal CT scan images at baseline and at the end of the 2-year follow-up period for 62 participants aged >18 years in the Prevention of Urinary Stones with Hydration (PUSH) randomized controlled trial. Stones were defined as an area of voxels with a minimum linear dimension of 2 mm that was higher in density than the mean plus 4 standard deviations of all nonnegative HU values within the kidney. The four outcomes assessed were: (1) growth of at least one existing stone by ≥2 mm, (2) formation of at least one new ≥2 mm stone, (3) no stone growth or new stone formation, and (4) loss of at least one stone. The accuracy of the algorithm was determined by comparing its outcomes to the gold standard of independent review of the CT images by at least two expert clinicians. Results: The algorithm correctly classified outcomes for 61 paired scans (98.4%). One pair that the algorithm incorrectly classified as stone growth was a new renal artery calcification on end-of-study CT. Conclusions: An automated image analysis method validated for the prospective PUSH trial was highly accurate for determining clinical outcomes of new stone formation, stone growth, stable stone size, and stone loss on longitudinal CT images. This method has the potential to improve the accuracy and efficiency of clinical care and endpoint determination for future clinical trials.
Deep Learning to Distinguish Benign from Malignant Renal Lesions Based on Routine MR Imaging
Xi, I., Wang, Robin , Chang, Marcello , Purkayastha, Subhanik , Chang, Ken, Huang, Raymond Y. , Silva, Alvin C. , Vallières, Martin , Habibollahi, Peiman , Zou, Beiji , Zhang, Paul J. , Zhang, Zishu , Bai, Harrison X. , Stavropoulos, S. William, Chang, Marcello , Vallières, Martin , Fan, Yong , Gade, Terence P , Soulen, Michael C , Huang, Raymond , Zhao, Yijun

Clinical Cancer Research | January 14, 2020 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1944-1952

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-0374 Get It

Abstract Purpose: With increasing incidence of renal mass, it is important to make a pretreatment differentiation between benign renal mass and malignant tumor. We aimed to develop a deep learning model that distinguishes benign renal tumors from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) by applying a residual convolutional neural network (ResNet) on routine MR imaging. Experimental Design: Preoperative MR images (T2-weighted and T1-postcontrast sequences) of 1,162 renal lesions definitely diagnosed on pathology or imaging in a multicenter cohort were divided into training, validation, and test sets (70:20:10 split). An ensemble model based on ResNet was built combining clinical variables and T1C and T2WI MR images using a bagging classifier to predict renal tumor pathology. Final model performance was compared with expert interpretation and the most optimized radiomics model. Results: Among the 1,162 renal lesions, 655 were malignant and 507 were benign. Compared with a baseline zero rule algorithm, the ensemble deep learning model had a statistically significant higher test accuracy (0.70 vs. 0.56, P = 0.004). Compared with all experts averaged, the ensemble deep learning model had higher test accuracy (0.70 vs. 0.60, P = 0.053), sensitivity (0.92 vs. 0.80, P = 0.017), and specificity (0.41 vs. 0.35, P = 0.450). Compared with the radiomics model, the ensemble deep learning model had higher test accuracy (0.70 vs. 0.62, P = 0.081), sensitivity (0.92 vs. 0.79, P = 0.012), and specificity (0.41 vs. 0.39, P = 0.770). Conclusions: Deep learning can noninvasively distinguish benign renal tumors from RCC using conventional MR imaging in a multi-institutional dataset with good accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity comparable with experts and radiomics.