Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26051106›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015

Differential diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma using Logic Learning Machine.

Stefano Parodi, Rosa Filiberti, Paola Marroni, Roberta Libener, Giovanni Paolo Ivaldi, Michele Mussap, Enrico Ferrari, Chiara Manneschi, Erika Montani, Marco Muselli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Interobserver variation in the assessment of the sarcomatoid and transitional components in biphasic mesotheliomas.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Stefano Parodi
Rosa Filiberti
Paola Marroni
Roberta Libener
Giovanni Paolo Ivaldi
Michele Mussap
Enrico Ferrari
Chiara Manneschi
Erika Montani
Marco Muselli
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino · ITNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine · USNational Research Council · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Nazionale SS. Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTumour markers are standard tools for the differential diagnosis of cancer. However, the occurrence of nonspecific symptoms and different malignancies involving the same cancer site may lead to a high proportion of misclassifications. Classification accuracy can be improved by combining information from different markers using standard data mining techniques, like Decision Tree (DT), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), and k-Nearest Neighbour (KNN) classifier. Unfortunately, each method suffers from some unavoidable limitations. DT, in general, tends to show a low classification performance, whereas ANN and KNN produce a "black-box" classification that does not provide biological information useful for clinical purposes.

methodsLogic Learning Machine (LLM) is an innovative method of supervised data analysis capable of building classifiers described by a set of intelligible rules including simple conditions in their antecedent part. It is essentially an efficient implementation of the Switching Neural Network model and reaches excellent classification accuracy while keeping low the computational demand. LLM was applied to data from a consecutive cohort of 169 patients admitted for diagnosis to two pulmonary departments in Northern Italy from 2009 to 2011. Patients included 52 malignant pleural mesotheliomas (MPM), 62 pleural metastases (MTX) from other tumours and 55 benign diseases (BD) associated with pleurisies. Concentration of three tumour markers (CEA, CYFRA 21-1 and SMRP) was measured in the pleural fluid of each patient and a cytological examination was also carried out. The performance of LLM and that of three competing methods (DT, KNN and ANN) was assessed by leave-one-out cross-validation.

resultsLLM outperformed all other considered methods. Global accuracy was 77.5% for LLM, 72.8% for DT, 54.4% for KNN, and 63.9% for ANN, respectively. In more details, LLM correctly classified 79% of MPM, 66% of MTX and 89% of BD. The corresponding figures for DT were: MPM = 83%, MTX = 55% and BD = 84%; for KNN: MPM = 58%, MTX = 45%, BD = 62%; for ANN: MPM = 71%, MTX = 47%, BD = 76%. Finally, LLM provided classification rules in a very good agreement with a priori knowledge about the biological role of the considered tumour markers.

conclusionsLLM is a new flexible tool potentially useful for the differential diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBiomarkers, TumorCohort StudiesDecision TreesDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansLogicLung NeoplasmsMaleMesotheliomaMesothelioma, MalignantMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeural Networks, ComputerPleural NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID26051106
PMCPMC4464205
OpenAlexW1672581350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.