Tejas S. Mathai

Qingqing Zhu, Qiao Jin, Tejas S. Mathai et al.

Artificial intelligence (AI) can automatically delineate lesions on computed tomography (CT) and generate radiology report content, yet progress is limited by the scarcity of publicly available CT datasets with lesion-level annotations. To bridge this gap, we introduce CT-Bench, a first-of-its-kind benchmark dataset comprising two components: a Lesion Image and Metadata Set containing 20,335 lesions from 7,795 CT studies with bounding boxes, descriptions, and size information, and a multitask visual question answering benchmark with 2,850 QA pairs covering lesion localization, description, size estimation, and attribute categorization. Hard negative examples are included to reflect real-world diagnostic challenges. We evaluate multiple state-of-the-art multimodal models, including vision-language and medical CLIP variants, by comparing their performance to radiologist assessments, demonstrating the value of CT-Bench as a comprehensive benchmark for lesion analysis. Moreover, fine-tuning models on the Lesion Image and Metadata Set yields significant performance gains across both components, underscoring the clinical utility of CT-Bench.

Qingqing Zhu, Benjamin Hou, Tejas S. Mathai et al.

Automatically interpreting CT scans can ease the workload of radiologists. However, this is challenging mainly due to the scarcity of adequate datasets and reference standards for evaluation. This study aims to bridge this gap by introducing a novel evaluation framework, named ``GPTRadScore''. This framework assesses the capabilities of multi-modal LLMs, such as GPT-4 with Vision (GPT-4V), Gemini Pro Vision, LLaVA-Med, and RadFM, in generating descriptions for prospectively-identified findings. By employing a decomposition technique based on GPT-4, GPTRadScore compares these generated descriptions with gold-standard report sentences, analyzing their accuracy in terms of body part, location, and type of finding. Evaluations demonstrated a high correlation with clinician assessments and highlighted its potential over traditional metrics, such as BLEU, METEOR, and ROUGE. Furthermore, to contribute to future studies, we plan to release a benchmark dataset annotated by clinicians. Using GPTRadScore, we found that while GPT-4V and Gemini Pro Vision fare better, their performance revealed significant areas for improvement, primarily due to limitations in the dataset used for training these models. To demonstrate this potential, RadFM was fine-tuned and it resulted in significant accuracy improvements: location accuracy rose from 3.41\% to 12.8\%, body part accuracy from 29.12\% to 53\%, and type accuracy from 9.24\% to 30\%, thereby validating our hypothesis.