Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37291251›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Comparison and fusion prediction model for lung adenocarcinoma with micropapillary and solid pattern using clinicoradiographic, radiomics and deep learning features.

Fen Wang, Cheng-Long Wang, Yin-Qiao Yi, Teng Zhang, Yan Zhong, Jia-Jia Zhu, Hai Li, Guang Yang, Tong-Fu Yu, Hai Xu and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

11 authors.

Fen Wang *Department of Medical Imaging Center, The Affiliated Huaian NO.1 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, No. 1 West Huanghe Road, Huaian, 223300, China.
Cheng-Long Wang *Shanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, East China Normal University, Shanghai, 200062, China.
Yin-Qiao YiShanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, East China Normal University, Shanghai, 200062, China.
Teng ZhangDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 GuangZhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Yan ZhongDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 GuangZhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Jia-Jia ZhuDepartment of Radiology, Jiangsu Province Official Hospital, Nanjing, 210024, China.
Hai LiDepartment of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Guang YangShanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, East China Normal University, Shanghai, 200062, China.
Tong-Fu YuDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 GuangZhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Hai Xu *Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 GuangZhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. xuhai507@126.com.
Mei Yuan *Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 GuangZhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. yuanmeijiangsu@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To investigate whether the combination scheme of deep learning score (DL-score) and radiomics can improve preoperative diagnosis in the presence of micropapillary/solid (MPP/SOL) patterns in lung adenocarcinoma (ADC). A retrospective cohort of 514 confirmed pathologically lung ADC in 512 patients after surgery was enrolled. The clinicoradiographic model (model 1) and radiomics model (model 2) were developed with logistic regression. The deep learning model (model 3) was constructed based on the deep learning score (DL-score). The combine model (model 4) was based on DL-score and R-score and clinicoradiographic variables. The performance of these models was evaluated with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared using DeLong's test internally and externally. The prediction nomogram was plotted, and clinical utility depicted with decision curve. The performance of model 1, model 2, model 3 and model 4 was supported by AUCs of 0.848, 0.896, 0.906, 0.921 in the Internal validation set, that of 0.700, 0.801, 0.730, 0.827 in external validation set, respectively. These models existed statistical significance in internal validation (model 4 vs model 3, P = 0.016; model 4 vs model 1, P = 0.009, respectively) and external validation (model 4 vs model 2, P = 0.036; model 4 vs model 3, P = 0.047; model 4 vs model 1, P = 0.016, respectively). The decision curve analysis (DCA) demonstrated that model 4 predicting the lung ADC with MPP/SOL structure would be more beneficial than the model 1and model 3 but comparable with the model 2. The combined model can improve preoperative diagnosis in the presence of MPP/SOL pattern in lung ADC in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Adenocarcinoma of LungDeep LearningLung NeoplasmsArea Under CurveHumansNomogramsRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37291251
PMCPMC10250309

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.