Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33718106›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2020

Predicting Metastasis Risk in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Using Deep Learning Image Analysis.

Sergey Klimov, Yue Xue, Arkadiusz Gertych, Rondell P Graham, Yi Jiang, Shristi Bhattarai, Stephen J Pandol, Emad A Rakha, Michelle D Reid, Ritu Aneja

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Sergey KlimovDepartment of Biology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Yue XueDepartment of Pathology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.
Arkadiusz GertychDepartment of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Rondell P GrahamDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Yi JiangDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Shristi BhattaraiDepartment of Biology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Stephen J PandolDepartment of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Emad A RakhaDepartment of Cellular Pathology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Michelle D ReidDepartment of Pathology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Ritu AnejaDepartment of Biology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Georgia State University · USCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USEmory University · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USNorthwestern University · USSilesian University of Technology · PLUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Evaluation of centrosome amplification as a risk-predictor for breast cancer aggrU01CA179671 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI ANEJA, RITU · 2014 to 2018
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA179671
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prognosis of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET), the second most common type of pancreatic cancer, varies significantly, and up to 15% of patients develop metastasis. Although certain morphological characteristics of PanNETs have been associated with patient outcome, there are no available morphology-based prognostic markers. Given that current clinical histopathology markers are unable to identify high-risk PanNET patients, the development of accurate prognostic biomarkers is needed. Here, we describe a novel machine learning, multiclassification pipeline to predict the risk of metastasis using morphological information from whole tissue slides.

methodsDigital images from surgically resected tissues from 89 PanNET patients were used. Pathologist-annotated regions were extracted to train a convolutional neural network (CNN) to identify tiles consisting of PanNET, stroma, normal pancreas parenchyma, and fat. Computationally annotated cancer or stroma tiles and patient metastasis status were used to train CNN to calculate a region based metastatic risk score. Aggregation of the metastatic probability scores across the slide was performed to predict the risk of metastasis.

resultsThe ability of CNN to discriminate different tissues was high (per-tile accuracy >95%; whole slide cancer regions Jaccard index = 79%). Cancer and stromal tiles with high evaluated probability provided F1 scores of 0.82 and 0.69, respectively, when we compared tissues from patients who developed metastasis and those who did not. The final model identified low-risk (n = 76) and high-risk (n = 13) patients, as well as predicted metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio: 4.71) after adjusting for common clinicopathological variables, especially in grade I/II patients.

conclusionUsing slides from surgically resected PanNETs, our novel, multiclassification, deep learning pipeline was able to predict the risk of metastasis in PanNET patients. Our results suggest the presence of prognostic morphological patterns in PanNET tissues, and that these patterns may help guide clinical decision making.

Indexed as

computational pathologydeep learninghistological image analysismetastasis risk assessmentpancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Identifiers

PMID33718106
PMCPMC7946991
OpenAlexW3130681742

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.