Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35788343›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology2022

Radiomics-based Machine-learning Models Can Detect Pancreatic Cancer on Prediagnostic Computed Tomography Scans at a Substantial Lead Time Before Clinical Diagnosis.

Sovanlal Mukherjee, Anurima Patra, Hala Khasawneh, Panagiotis Korfiatis, Naveen Rajamohan, Garima Suman, Shounak Majumder, Ananya Panda, Matthew P Johnson, Nicholas B Larson and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 104 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
104citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

104 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Artificial Intelligence in Pancreatic Imaging: A Systematic Review.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Bounding box-based 3D AI model for user-guided volumetric segmentation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma on standard-of-care CTs.Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.] · 2023
    Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Pancreatic cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Sovanlal MukherjeeDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Anurima PatraDepartment of Radiology, Tata Medical Centre, Kolkata, India.
Hala KhasawnehDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Panagiotis KorfiatisDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Naveen RajamohanDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Garima SumanDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Shounak MajumderDepartment of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Ananya PandaDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Matthew P JohnsonDepartment of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Nicholas B LarsonDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Darryl E WrightDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Timothy L KlineDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Joel G FletcherDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Suresh T ChariDepartment of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Ajit H GoenkaDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Electronic address: goenka.ajit@mayo.edu.

Funding

Optimizing Pancreatic Cancer Management with Next Generation Imaging and Liquid BiopsyR01CA256969 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Eric Collisson, Ajit Harishkumar Goenka · 2021 to 2026
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA256969
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsOur purpose was to detect pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at the prediagnostic stage (3-36 months before clinical diagnosis) using radiomics-based machine-learning (ML) models, and to compare performance against radiologists in a case-control study.

methodsVolumetric pancreas segmentation was performed on prediagnostic computed tomography scans (CTs) (median interval between CT and PDAC diagnosis: 398 days) of 155 patients and an age-matched cohort of 265 subjects with normal pancreas. A total of 88 first-order and gray-level radiomic features were extracted and 34 features were selected through the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-based feature selection method. The dataset was randomly divided into training (292 CTs: 110 prediagnostic and 182 controls) and test subsets (128 CTs: 45 prediagnostic and 83 controls). Four ML classifiers, k-nearest neighbor (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RM), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), were evaluated. Specificity of model with highest accuracy was further validated on an independent internal dataset (n = 176) and the public National Institutes of Health dataset (n = 80). Two radiologists (R4 and R5) independently evaluated the pancreas on a 5-point diagnostic scale.

resultsMedian (range) time between prediagnostic CTs of the test subset and PDAC diagnosis was 386 (97-1092) days. SVM had the highest sensitivity (mean; 95% confidence interval) (95.5; 85.5-100.0), specificity (90.3; 84.3-91.5), F1-score (89.5; 82.3-91.7), area under the curve (AUC) (0.98; 0.94-0.98), and accuracy (92.2%; 86.7-93.7) for classification of CTs into prediagnostic versus normal. All 3 other ML models, KNN, RF, and XGBoost, had comparable AUCs (0.95, 0.95, and 0.96, respectively). The high specificity of SVM was generalizable to both the independent internal (92.6%) and the National Institutes of Health dataset (96.2%). In contrast, interreader radiologist agreement was only fair (Cohen's kappa 0.3) and their mean AUC (0.66; 0.46-0.86) was lower than each of the 4 ML models (AUCs: 0.95-0.98) (P < .001). Radiologists also recorded false positive indirect findings of PDAC in control subjects (n = 83) (7% R4, 18% R5).

conclusionsRadiomics-based ML models can detect PDAC from normal pancreas when it is beyond human interrogation capability at a substantial lead time before clinical diagnosis. Prospective validation and integration of such models with complementary fluid-based biomarkers has the potential for PDAC detection at a stage when surgical cure is a possibility.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalPancreatic NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesHumansMachine LearningRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedArtificial IntelligenceBiomarkersPancreasPancreatic Ductal CarcinomaX-Ray Computed Tomography

Identifiers

PMID35788343
PMCPMC12285712

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.