ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Spotting malignancies from gastric endoscopic images using deep learning.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in gastric cancer: a systematic review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Deep learning in gastric tissue diseases: a systematic review.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Pooled it
- Trial
- AI-assisted endoscopic detection of Helicobacter pylori infection in atrophic gastritis: a multicenter diagnostic study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Dual-stream token fusion with Swin Transformer and lesion-aware tokens for gastric metaplasia classification in IoMT-assisted deployment.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Application of deep learning-based convolutional neural networks in gastrointestinal disease endoscopic examination.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Gastrointestinal tract disease classification from wireless capsule endoscopy images based on deep learning information fusion and Newton Raphson controlled marine predator algorithm.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Differential Diagnostic Value of Gastrointestinal Ultrasound Contrast Filling Method in Differentiating Gastric Tumors and Ulcers in the Elderly.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Deep ensemble learning for gastrointestinal diagnosis using endoscopic image classification.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- Validation of Artificial Intelligence Computer-Aided Detection on Gastric Neoplasm in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Cascade-EC Network: Recognition of Gastrointestinal Multiple Lesions Based on EfficientNet and CA_stm_Retinanet.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in gastroscopy: a narrative review.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Review
- Explainable AI-driven model for gastrointestinal cancer classification.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Development of an ensemble CNN model with explainable AI for the classification of gastrointestinal cancer.PloS one · 2024Article
- Gastro-BaseNet: A Specialized Pre-Trained Model for Enhanced Gastroscopic Data Classification and Diagnosis of Gastric Cancer and Ulcer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence system for the detection of Barrett's esophagus.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Deep Learning and Gastric Cancer: Systematic Review of AI-Assisted Endoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Third Eye? The Assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Endoscopy of Gastrointestinal Neoplasms.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- An Image Turing Test on Realistic Gastroscopy Images Generated by Using the Progressive Growing of Generative Adversarial Networks.Journal of digital imaging · 2023Article
- Toward next-generation endoscopes integrating biomimetic video systems, nonlinear optical microscopy, and deep learning.Biophysics reviews · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer is a common kind of malignancies, with yearly occurrences exceeding one million worldwide in 2017. Typically, ulcerous and cancerous tissues develop abnormal morphologies through courses of progression. Endoscopy is a routinely adopted means for examination of gastrointestinal tract for malignancy. Early and timely detection of malignancy closely correlate with good prognosis. Repeated presentation of similar frames from gastrointestinal tract endoscopy often weakens attention for practitioners to result in true patients missed out to incur higher medical cost and unnecessary morbidity. Highly needed is an automatic means for spotting visual abnormality and prompts for attention for medical staff for more thorough examination.
methodsWe conduct classification of benign ulcer and cancer for gastrointestinal endoscopic color images using deep neural network and transfer-learning approach. Using clinical data gathered from Gil Hospital, we built a dataset comprised of 200 normal, 367 cancer, and 220 ulcer cases, and applied the inception, ResNet, and VGGNet models pretrained on ImageNet. Three classes were defined-normal, benign ulcer, and cancer, and three separate binary classifiers were built-those for normal vs cancer, normal vs ulcer, and cancer vs ulcer for the corresponding classification tasks. For each task, considering inherent randomness entailed in the deep learning process, we performed data partitioning and model building experiments 100 times and averaged the performance values.
resultsAreas under curves of respective receiver operating characteristics were 0.95, 0.97, and 0.85 for the three classifiers. The ResNet showed the highest level of performance. The cases involving normal, i.e., normal vs ulcer and normal vs cancer resulted in accuracies above 90%. The case of ulcer vs cancer classification resulted in a lower accuracy of 77.1%, possibly due to smaller difference in appearance than those cases involving normal.
conclusionsThe overall level of performance of the proposed method was very promising to encourage applications in clinical environments. Automatic classification using deep learning technique as proposed can be used to complement manual inspection efforts for practitioners to minimize dangers of missed out positives resulting from repetitive sequence of endoscopic frames and weakening attentions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30719560What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.