ArticleCancers2023
Development of a Novel Intra-Operative Score to Record Diseases' Anatomic Fingerprints (ANAFI Score) for the Prediction of Complete Cytoreduction in Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer by Using Machine Learning and Explainable Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in ovarian pathophysiology and management: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Deep learning assisting the surgical management of gynecologic cancers.Current opinion in oncology · 2026Review
- MORPHology and Inter-observer Variation in Peritoneal Disease Assessment Among Expert Peritoneal Malignancy SUrgeonS: The MORPHEUS study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Incidence and Predictors of Acute Kidney Injury Following Advanced Ovarian Cancer Cytoreduction at a Tertiary UK Centre: An Exploratory Analysis and Insights from Explainable Artificial Intelligence.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Recent therapeutic advances in gynecologic oncology: evolving roles of immunotherapy, antibody-drug conjugates, and clinical trial innovations.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Application of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis, treatment, and recurrence prediction of peritoneal carcinomatosis.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Explaining the Elusive Nature of a Well-Defined Threshold for Blood Transfusion in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Prerequisites to improve surgical cytoreduction in FIGO stage III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer and subsequent clinical ramifications.Journal of ovarian research · 2023Article
- RoBERTa-Assisted Outcome Prediction in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreductive Surgery Using Operative Notes.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
- Survival Dynamics in Advanced Ovarian Cancer: R2 Resection Versus No-Surgery Paths Explored.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index (PCI) and the Intra-operative Mapping for Ovarian Cancer (IMO), to a lesser extent, have been universally validated in advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) to describe the extent of peritoneal dissemination and are proven to be powerful predictors of the surgical outcome with an added sensitivity of assessment at laparotomy of around 70%. This leaves room for improvement because the two-dimensional anatomic scoring model fails to reflect the patient's real anatomy, as seen by a surgeon. We hypothesized that tumor dissemination in specific anatomic locations can be more predictive of complete cytoreduction (CC0) and survival than PCI and IMO tools in EOC patients. (2) Methods: We analyzed prospectively data collected from 508 patients with FIGO-stage IIIB-IVB EOC who underwent cytoreductive surgery between January 2014 and December 2019 at a UK tertiary center. We adapted the structured ESGO ovarian cancer report to provide detailed information on the patterns of tumor dissemination (cancer anatomic fingerprints). We employed the extreme gradient boost (XGBoost) to model only the variables referring to the EOC disseminated patterns, to create an intra-operative score and judge the predictive power of the score alone for complete cytoreduction (CC0). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were then used for performance comparison between the new score and the existing PCI and IMO tools. We applied the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) framework to support the feature selection of the narrated cancer fingerprints and provide global and local explainability. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression. (3) Results: An intra-operative disease score was developed based on specific weights assigned to the cancer anatomic fingerprints. The scores range from 0 to 24. The XGBoost predicted CC0 resection (area under curve (AUC) = 0.88 CI = 0.854-0.913) with high accuracy. Organ-specific dissemination on the small bowel mesentery, large bowel serosa, and diaphragmatic peritoneum were the most crucial features globally. When added to the composite model, the novel score slightly enhanced its predictive value (AUC = 0.91, CI = 0.849-0.963). We identified a "turning point", ≤5, that increased the probability of CC0. Using conventional logistic regression, the new score was superior to the PCI and IMO scores for the prediction of CC0 (AUC = 0.81 vs. 0.73 and 0.67, respectively). In multivariate Cox analysis, a 1-point increase in the new intra-operative score was associated with poorer progression-free (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.03-1.09,
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.