Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bal, Sukhdeep, Colbourne, Emma, Gan, Jasmine, Griffanti, Ludovica, Hanayik, Taylor, Demeyere, Nele, Davies, Jim, Pendlebury, Sarah T, Jenkinson, Mark
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.08012
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866909779701530624
author Bal, Sukhdeep
Colbourne, Emma
Gan, Jasmine
Griffanti, Ludovica
Hanayik, Taylor
Demeyere, Nele
Davies, Jim
Pendlebury, Sarah T
Jenkinson, Mark
author_facet Bal, Sukhdeep
Colbourne, Emma
Gan, Jasmine
Griffanti, Ludovica
Hanayik, Taylor
Demeyere, Nele
Davies, Jim
Pendlebury, Sarah T
Jenkinson, Mark
contents Quantification of brain atrophy currently requires visual rating scales which are time consuming and automated brain image analysis is warranted. We validated our automated deep learning (DL) tool measuring the Global Cerebral Atrophy (GCA) score against trained human raters, and associations with age and cognitive impairment, in representative older (>65 years) patients. CT-brain scans were obtained from patients in acute medicine (ORCHARD-EPR), acute stroke (OCS studies) and a legacy sample. Scans were divided in a 60/20/20 ratio for training, optimisation and testing. CT-images were assessed by two trained raters (rater-1=864 scans, rater-2=20 scans). Agreement between DL tool-predicted GCA scores (range 0-39) and the visual ratings was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE) and Cohen's weighted kappa. Among 864 scans (ORCHARD-EPR=578, OCS=200, legacy scans=86), MAE between the DL tool and rater-1 GCA scores was 3.2 overall, 3.1 for ORCHARD-EPR, 3.3 for OCS and 2.6 for the legacy scans and half had DL-predicted GCA error between -2 and 2. Inter-rater agreement was Kappa=0.45 between the DL-tool and rater-1, and 0.41 between the tool and rater- 2 whereas it was lower at 0.28 for rater-1 and rater-2. There was no difference in GCA scores from the DL-tool and the two raters (one-way ANOVA, p=0.35) or in mean GCA scores between the DL-tool and rater-1 (paired t-test, t=-0.43, p=0.66), the tool and rater-2 (t=1.35, p=0.18) or between rater-1 and rater-2 (t=0.99, p=0.32). DL-tool GCA scores correlated with age and cognitive scores (both p<0.001). Our DL CT-brain analysis tool measured GCA score accurately and without user input in real-world scans acquired from older patients. Our tool will enable extraction of standardised quantitative measures of atrophy at scale for use in health data research and will act as proof-of-concept towards a point-of-care clinically approved tool.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_08012
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Validation of a CT-brain analysis tool for measuring global cortical atrophy in older patient cohorts
Bal, Sukhdeep
Colbourne, Emma
Gan, Jasmine
Griffanti, Ludovica
Hanayik, Taylor
Demeyere, Nele
Davies, Jim
Pendlebury, Sarah T
Jenkinson, Mark
Image and Video Processing
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
I.2; I.4
Quantification of brain atrophy currently requires visual rating scales which are time consuming and automated brain image analysis is warranted. We validated our automated deep learning (DL) tool measuring the Global Cerebral Atrophy (GCA) score against trained human raters, and associations with age and cognitive impairment, in representative older (>65 years) patients. CT-brain scans were obtained from patients in acute medicine (ORCHARD-EPR), acute stroke (OCS studies) and a legacy sample. Scans were divided in a 60/20/20 ratio for training, optimisation and testing. CT-images were assessed by two trained raters (rater-1=864 scans, rater-2=20 scans). Agreement between DL tool-predicted GCA scores (range 0-39) and the visual ratings was evaluated using mean absolute error (MAE) and Cohen's weighted kappa. Among 864 scans (ORCHARD-EPR=578, OCS=200, legacy scans=86), MAE between the DL tool and rater-1 GCA scores was 3.2 overall, 3.1 for ORCHARD-EPR, 3.3 for OCS and 2.6 for the legacy scans and half had DL-predicted GCA error between -2 and 2. Inter-rater agreement was Kappa=0.45 between the DL-tool and rater-1, and 0.41 between the tool and rater- 2 whereas it was lower at 0.28 for rater-1 and rater-2. There was no difference in GCA scores from the DL-tool and the two raters (one-way ANOVA, p=0.35) or in mean GCA scores between the DL-tool and rater-1 (paired t-test, t=-0.43, p=0.66), the tool and rater-2 (t=1.35, p=0.18) or between rater-1 and rater-2 (t=0.99, p=0.32). DL-tool GCA scores correlated with age and cognitive scores (both p<0.001). Our DL CT-brain analysis tool measured GCA score accurately and without user input in real-world scans acquired from older patients. Our tool will enable extraction of standardised quantitative measures of atrophy at scale for use in health data research and will act as proof-of-concept towards a point-of-care clinically approved tool.
title Validation of a CT-brain analysis tool for measuring global cortical atrophy in older patient cohorts
topic Image and Video Processing
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
I.2; I.4
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.08012