Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34145374›Full record

ArticleNPJ precision oncology2021

Deep learning for end-to-end kidney cancer diagnosis on multi-phase abdominal computed tomography.

Kwang-Hyun Uhm, Seung-Won Jung, Moon Hyung Choi, Hong-Kyu Shin, Jae-Ik Yoo, Se Won Oh, Jee Young Kim, Hyun Gi Kim, Young Joon Lee, Seo Yeon Youn and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

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

12 authors.

Kwang-Hyun Uhm *Department of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0819-2575
Seung-Won Jung *Department of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0319-4467
Moon Hyung Choi *Department of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Hong-Kyu ShinDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1382-184X
Jae-Ik YooDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5581-9193
Se Won OhDepartment of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Jee Young KimDepartment of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Hyun Gi KimDepartment of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Young Joon LeeDepartment of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Seo Yeon YounDepartment of Radiology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7692-3413
Sung-Hoo HongDepartment of Urology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea. toomey@catholic.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1952-4010
Sung-Jea KoDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea. sjko@korea.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4875-7091

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2020, it is estimated that 73,750 kidney cancer cases were diagnosed, and 14,830 people died from cancer in the United States. Preoperative multi-phase abdominal computed tomography (CT) is often used for detecting lesions and classifying histologic subtypes of renal tumor to avoid unnecessary biopsy or surgery. However, there exists inter-observer variability due to subtle differences in the imaging features of tumor subtypes, which makes decisions on treatment challenging. While deep learning has been recently applied to the automated diagnosis of renal tumor, classification of a wide range of subtype classes has not been sufficiently studied yet. In this paper, we propose an end-to-end deep learning model for the differential diagnosis of five major histologic subtypes of renal tumors including both benign and malignant tumors on multi-phase CT. Our model is a unified framework to simultaneously identify lesions and classify subtypes for the diagnosis without manual intervention. We trained and tested the model using CT data from 308 patients who underwent nephrectomy for renal tumors. The model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.889, and outperformed radiologists for most subtypes. We further validated the model on an independent dataset of 184 patients from The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA). The AUC for this dataset was 0.855, and the model performed comparably to the radiologists. These results indicate that our model can achieve similar or better diagnostic performance than radiologists in differentiating a wide range of renal tumors on multi-phase CT.

Identifiers

PMID34145374
PMCPMC8213852

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.