Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36765924›Full record

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.

Alexandros Laios, Evangelos Kalampokis, Racheal Johnson, Sarika Munot, Amudha Thangavelu, Richard Hutson, Tim Broadhead, Georgios Theophilou, David Nugent, Diederick De Jong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors.

Alexandros LaiosDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4870-7393
Evangelos KalampokisInformation Systems Lab, Department of Business Administration, University of Macedonia, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-4416-8764
Racheal JohnsonDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2677-2709
Sarika MunotDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Amudha ThangaveluDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Richard HutsonDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8963-5517
Tim BroadheadDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Georgios TheophilouDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
David NugentDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Diederick De JongDepartment of Gynaecologic Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0081-674X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

anatomic fingerprintscomplete cytoreductionepithelial ovarian cancerexplainble artificial intelligenceintra-operative mappingmachine learningperitoneal carcinomatosis index

Identifiers

PMID36765924
PMCPMC9913185

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.