ArticleEndocrine2023
Machine learning models for differential diagnosis of Cushing's disease and ectopic ACTH secretion syndrome.
Article in Endocrine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- A reliable and explainable deep learning framework for clinical-grade endocrine disorder risk prediction and decision support.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Radiomic Applications in Skull Base Pathology: A Systematic Review of Potential Clinical Uses.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2025Article
- Bilateral Inferior Petrosal Sinus Sampling Without Lateralization Is Less Accurate for the Diagnosis of Cushing Disease.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2024Article
- [Machine learning methods in differential diagnosis of ACTH-dependent hypercortisolism].Problemy endokrinologii · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUsing machine learning (ML) to explore the noninvasive differential diagnosis of Cushing's disease (CD) and ectopic corticotropin (ACTH) secretion (EAS) model is the next hot research topic. This study was to develop and evaluate ML models for differentially diagnosing CD and EAS in ACTH-dependent Cushing's syndrome (CS).
methodsTwo hundred sixty-four CD and forty-seven EAS were randomly divided into training and validation and test datasets. We applied 8 ML algorithms to select the most suitable model. The diagnostic performance of the optimal model and bilateral petrosal sinus sampling (BIPSS) were compared in the same cohort.
resultsEleven adopted variables included age, gender, BMI, duration of disease, morning cortisol, serum ACTH, 24-h UFC, serum potassium, HDDST, LDDST, and MRI. After model selection, the Random Forest (RF) model had the most extraordinary diagnostic performance, with a ROC AUC of 0.976 ± 0.03, a sensitivity of 98.9% ± 4.4%, and a specificity of 87.9% ± 3.0%. The serum potassium, MRI, and serum ACTH were the top three most important features in the RF model. In the validation dataset, the RF model had an AUC of 0.932, a sensitivity of 95.0%, and a specificity of 71.4%. In the complete dataset, the ROC AUC of the RF model was 0.984 (95% CI 0.950-0.993), which was significantly higher than HDDST and LDDST (both p < 0.001). There was no significant statistical difference in the comparison of ROC AUC between the RF model and BIPSS (baseline ROC AUC 0.988 95% CI 0.983-1.000, after stimulation ROC AUC 0.992 95% CI 0.983-1.000). This diagnostic model was shared as an open-access website.
conclusionsA machine learning-based model could be a practical noninvasive approach to distinguishing CD and EAS. The diagnostic performance might be close to BIPSS.
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.