Zaigham Saghir

Dr. Zaigham Saghir

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
27 January 2012 in Thorax
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ZSZaigham Saghir
Zaigham Saghir
ADAsger Dirksen
Asger Dirksen
HAHaseem Ashraf
Haseem Ashraf
KBKaren Skjøldstrup Bach
Karen Skjøldstrup Bach
JBJohn Brodersen
John Brodersen
JPJesper Holst Pedersen
Jesper Holst Pedersen
Background The effects of low-dose CT screening on disease stage shift, mortality and overdiagnosis are unclear. Lung cancer findings and mortality rates are reported at the end of screening in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial. Methods 4104 men and women, healthy heavy smokers/former smokers were randomised to five annual low-dose CT screenings or no screening. Two experienced chest radiologists read all CT scans and registered the location, size and morphology of nodules. Nodules between 5 and 15 mm without benign characteristics were rescanned after 3 months. Growing nodules (>25% volume increase and/or volume doubling time15 mm were referred for diagnostic workup. In the control group, lung cancers were diagnosed and treated outside the study by the usual clinical practice. Results Participation rates were high in both groups (screening: 95.5%; control: 93.0%; p<0.001). Lung cancer detection rate was 0.83% at baseline and mean annual detection rate was 0.67% at incidence rounds (p=0.535). More lung cancers were diagnosed in the screening group (69 vs 24, p<0.001), and more were low stage (48 vs 21 stage I–IIB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and limited stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), p=0.002), whereas frequencies of high-stage lung cancer were the same (21 vs 16 stage IIIA–IV NSCLC and extensive stage SCLC, p=0.509). At the end of screening, 61 patients died in the screening group and 42 in the control group (p=0.059). 15 and 11 died of lung cancer, respectively (p=0.428). Conclusion CT screening for lung cancer brings forward early disease, and at this point no stage shift or reduction in mortality was observed. More lung cancers were diagnosed in the screening group, indicating some degree of overdiagnosis and need for longer follow-up.

1 August 2021 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KVKiran Vaidhya Venkadesh
Kiran Vaidhya Venkadesh
ASArnaud A. A. Setio
Arnaud A. A. Setio
ASAnton Schreuder
Anton Schreuder
ESErnst T. Scholten
Ernst T. Scholten
KCKaman Chung
Kaman Chung
CJColin Jacobs
Colin Jacobs
A deep learning algorithm, developed for malignancy risk estimation of pulmonary nodules detected at screening CT, demonstrated good discriminative performance in a large independent validation set. Background Accurate estimation of the malignancy risk of pulmonary nodules at chest CT is crucial for optimizing management in lung cancer screening. Purpose To develop and validate a deep learning...

24 June 2020 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GVGiulia Veronesi
Giulia Veronesi
DBDavid R. Baldwin
David R. Baldwin
CHClaudia I. Henschke
Claudia I. Henschke
SGSimone Ghislandi
Simone Ghislandi
SERGIO IAVICOLISERGIO IAVICOLI
SERGIO IAVICOLI
GPGiuseppe Pelosi
Giuseppe Pelosi
Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was demonstrated in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) to reduce mortality from the disease. European mortality data has recently become available from the Nelson randomised controlled trial, which confirmed lung cancer mortality reductions by 26% in men and 39–61% in women. Recent studies in Europe and the USA also showed positive results in screening workers exposed to asbestos. All European experts attending the “Initiative for European Lung Screening (IELS)”—a large international group of physicians and other experts concerned with lung cancer—agreed that LDCT-LCS should be implemented in Europe. However, the economic impact of LDCT-LCS and guidelines for its effective and safe implementation still need to be formulated. To this purpose, the IELS was asked to prepare recommendations to implement LCS and examine outstanding issues. A subgroup carried out a comprehensive literature review on LDCT-LCS and presented findings at a meeting held in Milan in November 2018. The present recommendations reflect that consensus was reached.

1 March 2016
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JPJesper Holst Pedersen
Jesper Holst Pedersen
ZSZaigham Saghir
Zaigham Saghir
MWMathilde Marie Winkler Wille
Mathilde Marie Winkler Wille
LTLaura Hohwü Thomsen
Laura Hohwü Thomsen
BSBirgit Guldhammer Skov
Birgit Guldhammer Skov
HAHaseem Ashraf
Haseem Ashraf

1 September 2023 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NANatália Alves
Natália Alves
JBJoeran S. Bosma
Joeran S. Bosma
KVKiran V. Venkadesh
Kiran V. Venkadesh
CJColin Jacobs
Colin Jacobs
ZSZaigham Saghir
Zaigham Saghir
HHHenkjan J. Huisman
Henkjan J. Huisman
Background A priori identification of patients at risk of artificial intelligence (AI) failure in diagnosing cancer would contribute to the safer clinical integration of diagnostic algorithms. Purpose To evaluate AI prediction variability as an uncertainty quantification (UQ) metric for identifying cases at risk of AI failure in diagnosing cancer at MRI and CT across different cancer types, data sets, and algorithms. Materials and Methods Multicenter data sets and publicly available AI algorithms from three previous studies that evaluated detection of pancreatic cancer on contrast-enhanced CT images, detection of prostate cancer on MRI scans, and prediction of pulmonary nodule malignancy on low-dose CT images were analyzed retrospectively. Each task's algorithm was extended to generate an uncertainty score based on ensemble prediction variability. AI accuracy percentage and partial area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (pAUC) were compared between certain and uncertain patient groups in a range of percentile thresholds (10%-90%) for the uncertainty score using permutation tests for statistical significance. The pulmonary nodule malignancy prediction algorithm was compared with 11 clinical readers for the certain group (CG) and uncertain group (UG). Results In total, 18 022 images were used for training and 838 images were used for testing. AI diagnostic accuracy was higher for the cases in the CG across all tasks (P < .001). At an 80% threshold of certain predictions, accuracy in the CG was 21%-29% higher than in the UG and 4%-6% higher than in the overall test data sets. The lesion-level pAUC in the CG was 0.25-0.39 higher than in the UG and 0.05-0.08 higher than in the overall test data sets (P < .001). For pulmonary nodule malignancy prediction, accuracy of AI was on par with clinicians for cases in the CG (AI results vs clinician results, 80% [95% CI: 76, 85] vs 78% [95% CI: 70, 87]; P = .07) but worse for cases in the UG (AI results vs clinician results, 50% [95% CI: 37, 64] vs 68% [95% CI: 60, 76]; P < .001). Conclusion An AI-prediction UQ metric consistently identified reduced performance of AI in cancer diagnosis. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Babyn in this issue.

1 August 2023 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KVKiran Vaidhya Venkadesh
Kiran Vaidhya Venkadesh
TATajwar Abrar Aleef
Tajwar Abrar Aleef
ESErnst T. Scholten
Ernst T. Scholten
ZSZaigham Saghir
Zaigham Saghir
MSMario Silva
Mario Silva
CJColin Jacobs
Colin Jacobs
Background Prior chest CT provides valuable temporal information (eg, changes in nodule size or appearance) to accurately estimate malignancy risk. Purpose To develop a deep learning (DL) algorithm that uses a current and prior low-dose CT examination to estimate 3-year malignancy risk of pulmonary nodules. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, the algorithm was trained using National Lung Screening Trial data (collected from 2002 to 2004), wherein patients were imaged at most 2 years apart, and evaluated with two external test sets from the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST) and the Multicentric Italian Lung Detection Trial (MILD), collected in 2004-2010 and 2005-2014, respectively. Performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on cancer-enriched subsets with size-matched benign nodules imaged 1 and 2 years apart from DLCST and MILD, respectively. The algorithm was compared with a validated DL algorithm that only processed a single CT examination and the Pan-Canadian Early Lung Cancer Detection Study (PanCan) model. Results The training set included 10 508 nodules (422 malignant) in 4902 trial participants (mean age, 64 years ± 5 [SD]; 2778 men). The size-matched external test sets included 129 nodules (43 malignant) and 126 nodules (42 malignant). The algorithm achieved AUCs of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.97) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.98). It significantly outperformed the DL algorithm that only processed a single CT examination (AUC, 0.85 [95% CI: 0.78, 0.92; P = .002]; and AUC, 0.89 [95% CI: 0.84, 0.95; P = .01]) and the PanCan model (AUC, 0.64 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.74; P < .001]; and AUC, 0.63 [95% CI: 0.52, 0.74; P < .001]). Conclusion A DL algorithm using current and prior low-dose CT examinations was more effective at estimating 3-year malignancy risk of pulmonary nodules than established models that only use a single CT examination. Clinical trial registration nos. NCT00047385, NCT00496977, NCT02837809 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Horst and Nishino in this issue.