Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36249050›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

CT-based transformer model for non-invasively predicting the Fuhrman nuclear grade of clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Meiyi Yang, Xiaopeng He, Lifeng Xu, Minghui Liu, Jiali Deng, Xuan Cheng, Yi Wei, Qian Li, Shang Wan, Feng Zhang and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract 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
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. State of the art review of AI in renal imaging.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A self-supervised classification model for endometrial diseases.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Meiyi YangYangtze Delta Region Institute (Quzhou), University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Quzhou, China.
Xiaopeng HeDepartment of Radiology, Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Lifeng XuQuzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, China.
Minghui LiuSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Jiali DengSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xuan ChengSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Yi WeiDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qian LiDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Shang WanDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Feng ZhangQuzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, China.
Lei WuSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xiaomin WangSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Bin SongDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ming LiuQuzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Quzhou People's Hospital, Quzhou, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNSichuan University · CNAffiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University · CNWenzhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Clear cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common malignant tumor in the urinary system and the predominant subtype of malignant renal tumors with high mortality. Biopsy is the main examination to determine ccRCC grade, but it can lead to unavoidable complications and sampling bias. Therefore, non-invasive technology (e.g., CT examination) for ccRCC grading is attracting more and more attention. However, noise labels on CT images containing multiple grades but only one label make prediction difficult. However, noise labels exist in CT images, which contain multiple grades but only one label, making prediction difficult. Aim: We proposed a Transformer-based deep learning algorithm with CT images to improve the diagnostic accuracy of grading prediction and to improve the diagnostic accuracy of ccRCC grading. Methods: We integrate different training models to improve robustness and predict Fuhrman nuclear grade. Then, we conducted experiments on a collected ccRCC dataset containing 759 patients and used average classification accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and AreaUnderCurve as indicators to evaluate the quality of research. In the comparative experiments, we further performed various current deep learning algorithms to show the advantages of the proposed method. We collected patients with pathologically proven ccRCC diagnosed from April 2010 to December 2018 as the training and internal test dataset, containing 759 patients. We propose a transformer-based network architecture that efficiently employs convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and self-attention mechanisms to extract a persuasive feature automatically. And then, a nonlinear classifier is applied to classify. We integrate different training models to improve the accuracy and robustness of the model. The average classification accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve are used as indicators to evaluate the quality of a model. Results: The mean accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and Area Under Curve achieved by CNN were 82.3%, 89.4%, 83.2%, and 85.7%, respectively. In contrast, the proposed Transformer-based model obtains a mean accuracy of 87.1% with a sensitivity of 91.3%, a specificity of 85.3%, and an Area Under Curve (AUC) of 90.3%. The integrated model acquires a better performance (86.5% ACC and an AUC of 91.2%). Conclusion: A transformer-based network performs better than traditional deep learning algorithms in terms of the accuracy of ccRCC prediction. Meanwhile, the transformer has a certain advantage in dealing with noise labels existing in CT images of ccRCC. This method is promising to be applied to other medical tasks (e.g., the grade of neurogliomas and meningiomas).

Indexed as

clear cell renal cell carcinomadeep learningensemble learningtransformer networktumor grading

Identifiers

PMID36249050
PMCPMC9555088
OpenAlexW4297493521

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.