Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28105470›Full record

ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2016

Bladder Cancer Segmentation in CT for Treatment Response Assessment: Application of Deep-Learning Convolution Neural Network-A Pilot Study.

Kenny H Cha, Lubomir M Hadjiiski, Ravi K Samala, Heang-Ping Chan, Richard H Cohan, Elaine M Caoili, Chintana Paramagul, Ajjai Alva, Alon Z Weizer

Open access · goldAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Radiomics based onQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025
    Article
  7. Artificial intelligence for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. A Survey on Deep Learning for Precision Oncology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Use of radiomics based onEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kenny H ChaDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Lubomir M HadjiiskiDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Ravi K SamalaDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Heang-Ping ChanDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Richard H CohanDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Elaine M CaoiliDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Chintana ParamagulDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Ajjai AlvaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hematology-Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Alon Z WeizerDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USMichigan Center for Translational Pathology · US

Funding

Biomarkers for Staging and Treatment Response Monitoring of Bladder CancerU01CA179106 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HADJIYSKI, LUBOMIR M · 2014 to 2017
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA179106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessing the response of bladder cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is crucial for reducing morbidity and increasing quality of life of patients. Changes in tumor volume during treatment is generally used to predict treatment outcome. We are developing a method for bladder cancer segmentation in CT using a pilot data set of 62 cases. 65 000 regions of interests were extracted from pre-treatment CT images to train a deep-learning convolution neural network (DL-CNN) for tumor boundary detection using leave-one-case-out cross-validation. The results were compared to our previous AI-CALS method. For all lesions in the data set, the longest diameter and its perpendicular were measured by two radiologists, and 3D manual segmentation was obtained from one radiologist. The World Health Organization (WHO) criteria and the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) were calculated, and the prediction accuracy of complete response to chemotherapy was estimated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The AUCs were 0.73 ± 0.06, 0.70 ± 0.07, and 0.70 ± 0.06, respectively, for the volume change calculated using DL-CNN segmentation, the AI-CALS and the manual contours. The differences did not achieve statistical significance. The AUCs using the WHO criteria were 0.63 ± 0.07 and 0.61 ± 0.06, while the AUCs using RECIST were 0.65 ± 007 and 0.63 ± 0.06 for the two radiologists, respectively. Our results indicate that DL-CNN can produce accurate bladder cancer segmentation for calculation of tumor size change in response to treatment. The volume change performed better than the estimations from the WHO criteria and RECIST for the prediction of complete response.

Indexed as

bladder cancercomputer-aided diagnosisCTdeep-learninglevel setsegmentationtreatment response

Identifiers

PMID28105470
PMCPMC5241049
OpenAlexW2582220857

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.