ArticleHeliyon2022
Differentiating malignant pleural mesothelioma and metastatic pleural disease based on a machine learning model with primary CT signs: A multicentre study.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Classifying diagnostic pitfalls in juxtapleural CT lesions: A root cause.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based model assists in differentiating Mycobacterium avium Complex Pulmonary Disease from Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Multicenter Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Development and external validation of machine-learning models for diagnosing malignant pleural effusion.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Diagnosis of Mesothelioma Using Image Segmentation and Class-Based Deep Feature Transformations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Beyond Comorbidity: Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma in a Patient with Rheumatoid Arthritis-A Case Report and Literature Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based Diagnostic model for determining the etiology of pleural effusion using Age, ADA and LDH.Respiratory research · 2025Article
- Article
- Successful treatment of simultaneous malignant pleural mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma: A case report.Oncology letters · 2024Article
- A critical review of asbestos concentrations in water and air, according to exposure sources.Heliyon · 2023Review
- Malignant mesothelioma tumours: molecular pathogenesis, diagnosis, and therapies accompanying clinical studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Predicting Mesothelioma Using Artificial Intelligence: A Scoping Review of Common Models and Applications.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rationale and Objectives: It is still a challenge to make confirming diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), especially differentiating from metastatic pleural disease (MPD). The aim of this study was to develop a model to distinguish MPM with MPD based on primary CT signs. Materials and methods: We retrospectively recruited 150 MPM patients and 147 MPD patients from two centers and assigned them to training (115 MPM patients and 113 MPD patients) and testing (35 MPM patients and 34 MPD patients) cohorts. The images were analyzed for pleural thickening, hydrothorax, lymphadenopathy, thoracic volume and calcified pleural plaque (CPP). The selected clinical characteristics and primary CT signs comprised the model by multivariate logistic regression in the training cohort. Then the model was tested on the external testing cohort. ROC curve and F1 score were used to validate the capability of the model in both two cohorts. Results: There were significant differences between two groups: (1) carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA); (2) nodular and mass pleural thickening; (3) the enhancement of pleura; (4) focal, diffuse and circumferential pleural thickening; (5) the thickest pleura; (6) thickening of diaphragmatic pleura; (7) multiple nodules and effusion of interlobar pleura; (8) hilar LN and ring enhancement of LN; (9) punctate and stipe CPP. The AUC and F1 score of the model were 0.970 and 0.857 in the training cohort, 0.955 and 0.818 in the testing cohort. Conclusion: The model holds promise for use as a diagnostic tool to distinguish MPM from MPD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.