Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33712598›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

Predicting gastric cancer outcome from resected lymph node histopathology images using deep learning.

Xiaodong Wang, Ying Chen, Yunshu Gao, Huiqing Zhang, Zehui Guan, Zhou Dong, Yuxuan Zheng, Jiarui Jiang, Haoqing Yang, Liming Wang and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing 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

92 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

18 authors.

Xiaodong Wang *School of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1711-2933
Ying Chen *Department of Pathology Center of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Yunshu Gao *Department of Oncology, General Hospital of PLA, Beijing, China.
Huiqing Zhang *Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Jiangxi Provincial Cancer Hospital, Nangchang, China.
Zehui GuanSchool of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, China.
Zhou DongSchool of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, China.
Yuxuan ZhengSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Jiarui JiangSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Haoqing YangSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Liming WangSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an, China.
Xianming HuangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Jiangxi Provincial Cancer Hospital, Nangchang, China.
Lirong AiSchool of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, China.
Wenlong YuDepartment of Surgery Oncology, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Shanghai, China.
Hongwei LiDepartment of Oncology, Longhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Changsheng DongDepartment of Oncology, Longhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhou ZhouDepartment of Oncology, Longhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiyang LiuSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an, China. xyliu@xidian.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-5214-3677
Guanzhen YuDepartment of Oncology, Longhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China. qiaoshanqian@aliyun.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6193-8148

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

N-staging is a determining factor for prognostic assessment and decision-making for stage-based cancer therapeutic strategies. Visual inspection of whole-slides of intact lymph nodes is currently the main method used by pathologists to calculate the number of metastatic lymph nodes (MLNs). Moreover, even at the same N stage, the outcome of patients varies dramatically. Here, we propose a deep-learning framework for analyzing lymph node whole-slide images (WSIs) to identify lymph nodes and tumor regions, and then to uncover tumor-area-to-MLN-area ratio (T/MLN). After training, our model's tumor detection performance was comparable to that of experienced pathologists and achieved similar performance on two independent gastric cancer validation cohorts. Further, we demonstrate that T/MLN is an interpretable independent prognostic factor. These findings indicate that deep-learning models could assist not only pathologists in detecting lymph nodes with metastases but also oncologists in exploring new prognostic factors, especially those that are difficult to calculate manually.

Indexed as

Deep LearningFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisStomach NeoplasmsSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID33712598
PMCPMC7954798

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.