Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31232960›Full record

ArticleMedicine2019

Application of deep learning (3-dimensional convolutional neural network) for the prediction of pathological invasiveness in lung adenocarcinoma: A preliminary study.

Masahiro Yanagawa, Hirohiko Niioka, Akinori Hata, Noriko Kikuchi, Osamu Honda, Hiroyuki Kurakami, Eiichi Morii, Masayuki Noguchi, Yoshiyuki Watanabe, Jun Miyake and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2019. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. A Review of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Imaging.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  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

11 authors.

Masahiro YanagawaDepartment of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine.
Hirohiko NiiokaInstitute for Datability Science.
Akinori HataDepartment of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine.
Noriko KikuchiDepartment of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine.
Osamu HondaDepartment of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine.
Hiroyuki KurakamiDepartment of Medical Innovation, Osaka University.
Eiichi MoriiDepartment of Pathology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita-city, Osaka.
Masayuki NoguchiDepartment of Diagnostic Pathology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba-city, Ibaraki.
Yoshiyuki WatanabeDepartment of Future Diagnostic Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine.
Jun MiyakeGlobal Center for Medical Engineering and Informatics, Osaka University, Suita-city, Osaka, Japan.
Noriyuki TomiyamaDepartment of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare results for radiological prediction of pathological invasiveness in lung adenocarcinoma between radiologists and a deep learning (DL) system.Ninety patients (50 men, 40 women; mean age, 66 years; range, 40-88 years) who underwent pre-operative chest computed tomography (CT) with 0.625-mm slice thickness were included in this retrospective study. Twenty-four cases of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), 20 cases of minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA), and 46 cases of invasive adenocarcinoma (IVA) were pathologically diagnosed. Three radiologists of different levels of experience diagnosed each nodule by using previously documented CT findings to predict pathological invasiveness. DL was structured using a 3-dimensional (3D) convolutional neural network (3D-CNN) constructed with 2 successive pairs of convolution and max-pooling layers, and 2 fully connected layers. The output layer comprises 3 nodes to recognize the 3 conditions of adenocarcinoma (AIS, MIA, and IVA) or 2 nodes for 2 conditions (AIS and MIA/IVA). Results from DL and the 3 radiologists were statistically compared.No significant differences in pathological diagnostic accuracy rates were seen between DL and the 3 radiologists (P >.11). Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that area under the curve for DL (0.712) was almost the same as that for the radiologist with extensive experience (0.714; P = .98). Compared with the consensus results from radiologists, DL offered significantly inferior sensitivity (P = .0005), but significantly superior specificity (P = .02).Despite the small training data set, diagnostic performance of DL was almost the same as the radiologist with extensive experience. In particular, DL provided higher specificity than radiologists.

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma of LungAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveDeep LearningFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessPredictive Value of TestsROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID31232960
PMCPMC6636940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.