Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36033454›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Development and validation of a deep learning model to predict survival of patients with esophageal cancer.

Chen Huang, Yongmei Dai, Qianshun Chen, Hongchao Chen, Yuanfeng Lin, Jingyu Wu, Xunyu Xu, Xiao Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Chen HuangShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Yongmei DaiShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Oncology, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Qianshun ChenShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Hongchao ChenShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Yuanfeng LinShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Jingyu WuShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Xunyu XuShengli Clinical College of Fujian Medical University, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Xiao ChenCollege of Mathematics and Data Science (Software College), Minjiang University, Fuzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To compare the performance of a deep learning survival network with the tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) staging system in survival prediction and test the reliability of individual treatment recommendations provided by the network. Methods: In this population-based cohort study, we developed and validated a deep learning survival model using consecutive cases of newly diagnosed stage I to IV esophageal cancer between January 2004 and December 2015 in a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The model was externally validated in an independent cohort from Fujian Provincial Hospital. The C statistic was used to compare the performance of the deep learning survival model and TNM staging system. Two other deep learning risk prediction models were trained for treatment recommendations. A Kaplan-Meier survival curve was used to compare survival between the population that followed the recommended therapy and those who did not. Results: A total of 9069 patients were included in this study. The deep learning network showed more promising results in predicting esophageal cancer-specific survival than the TNM stage in the internal test dataset (C-index=0.753 vs. 0.638) and external validation dataset (C-index=0.687 vs. 0.643). The population who received the recommended treatments had superior survival compared to those who did not, based on the internal test dataset (hazard ratio, 0.753; 95% CI, 0.556-0.987; P=0.042) and the external validation dataset (hazard ratio, 0.633; 95% CI, 0.459-0.834; P=0.0003). Conclusion: Deep learning neural networks have potential advantages over traditional linear models in prognostic assessment and treatment recommendations. This novel analytical approach may provide reliable information on individual survival and treatment recommendations for patients with esophageal cancer.

Indexed as

deep learningDeepSurvesophageal cancersurvival predictiontreatment recommendation

Identifiers

PMID36033454
PMCPMC9399685

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.