Abstract
Background There are similarities and differences between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma patients in terms of computed tomography (CT) disease-related features. Our objective was to determine the optimal subset of CT imaging features for differentiating COPD and asthma using machine learning.
Methods COPD and asthma patients were recruited from Heidelberg University Hospital (Heidelberg, Germany). CT was acquired and 93 features were extracted: percentage of low-attenuating area below −950 HU (LAA950), low-attenuation cluster (LAC) total hole count, estimated airway wall thickness for an idealised airway with an internal perimeter of 10 mm (Pi10), total airway count (TAC), as well as airway inner/outer perimeters/areas and wall thickness for each of five segmental airways, and the average of those five airways. Hybrid feature selection was used to select the optimum number of features, and support vector machine learning was used to classify COPD and asthma.
Results 95 participants were included (n=48 COPD and n=47 asthma); there were no differences between COPD and asthma for age (p=0.25) or forced expiratory volume in 1 s (p=0.31). In a model including all CT features, the accuracy and F1 score were 80% and 81%, respectively. The top features were: LAA950, outer airway perimeter, inner airway perimeter, TAC, outer airway area RB1, inner airway area RB1 and LAC total hole count. In the model with only CT airway features, the accuracy and F1 score were 66% and 68%, respectively. The top features were: inner airway area RB1, outer airway area LB1, outer airway perimeter, inner airway perimeter, Pi10, TAC, airway wall thickness RB1 and TAC LB10.
Conclusion COPD and asthma can be differentiated using machine learning with moderate-to-high accuracy by a subset of only seven CT features.
Abstract
Asthma and COPD can be differentiated with high accuracy using a subset of only seven CT features by machine learning. Reduced CT emphysema and total airway count play an important role in distinguishing patients with asthma from COPD. https://bit.ly/3gOW6rq
Footnotes
This article has an editorial commentary: https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00679-2022
Author contributions: A. Moslemi, K. Kontogianni, J. Brock, S. Wood, F. Herth and M. Kirby made substantial contributions to the design of the study, the analysis and interpretation of data; drafting and revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content; and final approval of the manuscript. F. Herth and M. Kirby made substantial contributions to the design of the study, the analysis and interpretation of data; drafting and revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the manuscript version; and have given agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Conflict of interest: S. Wood is a CEO and shareholder of VIDA Diagnostics, a company commercialising lung image analysis software. F. Herth is affiliated with, or has received grants or research support from, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), BMG Pharma, Broncus-Uptake Medical, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), European Union, Klaus Tschirra Stiftung, Olympus Medical Systems, Pulmonx and Roche Diagnostics; honoraria or consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici SpA, Erbe China, Novartis, MedUpdates, Pulmonx, Roche Diagnostics, Uptake Medical, Boston Scientific, Broncus-Uptake Medical, Dinova Pharmaceutical Inc., Erbe Medical, Free Flow Medical, Johnson & Johnson, Karger Publishers, LAK Medical, Nanovation and Olympus Medical. All other authors do not have any potential conflicts of interest to declare.
- Received December 7, 2021.
- Accepted February 4, 2022.
- Copyright ©The authors 2022. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org