Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37095223›Full record

ArticleCommunications medicine2023

Predicting lymph node metastasis from primary tumor histology and clinicopathologic factors in colorectal cancer using deep learning.

Justin D Krogue, Shekoofeh Azizi, Fraser Tan, Isabelle Flament-Auvigne, Trissia Brown, Markus Plass, Robert Reihs, Heimo Müller, Kurt Zatloukal, Pema Richeson and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

20 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Justin D KrogueGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA. justin.d.krogue@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6756-4877
Shekoofeh AziziGoogle Research, Brain Team, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7447-6031
Fraser TanGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Isabelle Flament-AuvigneGoogle Health via Vituity, Emeryville, CA, USA.
Trissia BrownGoogle Health via Vituity, Emeryville, CA, USA.
Markus PlassMedical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2718-7648
Robert ReihsMedical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8439-3689
Heimo MüllerMedical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9691-4872
Kurt ZatloukalMedical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5299-7218
Pema RichesonDepartment of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Greg S CorradoGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Lily H PengGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Craig H MermelGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Yun LiuGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4079-8275
Po-Hsuan Cameron ChenGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0083-4991
Saurabh GombarDepartment of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Thomas MontineDepartment of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Jeanne ShenDepartment of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
David F SteinerGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1297-0023
Ellery WulczynGoogle Health, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Google (United States) · USMedical University of Graz · ATStanford University · USGoogle (Canada) · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPresence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) influences prognosis and clinical decision-making in colorectal cancer. However, detection of LNM is variable and depends on a number of external factors. Deep learning has shown success in computational pathology, but has struggled to boost performance when combined with known predictors.

methodsMachine-learned features are created by clustering deep learning embeddings of small patches of tumor in colorectal cancer via k-means, and then selecting the top clusters that add predictive value to a logistic regression model when combined with known baseline clinicopathological variables. We then analyze performance of logistic regression models trained with and without these machine-learned features in combination with the baseline variables.

resultsThe machine-learned extracted features provide independent signal for the presence of LNM (AUROC: 0.638, 95% CI: [0.590, 0.683]). Furthermore, the machine-learned features add predictive value to the set of 6 clinicopathologic variables in an external validation set (likelihood ratio test, p < 0.00032; AUROC: 0.740, 95% CI: [0.701, 0.780]). A model incorporating these features can also further risk-stratify patients with and without identified metastasis (p < 0.001 for both stage II and stage III).

conclusionThis work demonstrates an effective approach to combine deep learning with established clinicopathologic factors in order to identify independently informative features associated with LNM. Further work building on these specific results may have important impact in prognostication and therapeutic decision making for LNM. Additionally, this general computational approach may prove useful in other contexts.

Identifiers

PMID37095223
PMCPMC10125969
OpenAlexW4366823058

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.