ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2023
Performance of deep learning models for response evaluation on whole-body bone scans in prostate cancer.
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence and Radiomics Applied to Prostate Cancer Bone Metastasis Imaging: A Review.iRadiology · 2024Article
- Clinical performance of deep learning-enhanced ultrafast whole-body scintigraphy in patients with suspected malignancy.BMC medical imaging · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to develop deep learning classifiers for assessing therapeutic response on bone scans of patients with prostate cancer.
methodsA set of 3791 consecutive bone scans coupled with their last previous scan (1528 patients) was evaluated. Bone scans were labeled as "progression" or "nonprogression" on the basis of clinical reports and image review. A 2D-convolutional neural network architecture was trained with three different preprocessing methods: 1) no preprocessing (Raw), 2) spatial normalization (SN), and 3) spatial and count normalization (SCN). Data were allocated into training, validation, and test sets in the ratio of 72:8:20, with the 20% independent test set rotating all scans over a five-fold testing procedure. A Grad-CAM algorithm was employed to generate class activation maps to visualize the lesions contributing to the decision. Diagnostic performance was compared using area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUCs).
resultsThe data consisted of 791 scans labeled as "progression" and 3000 scans labeled as "nonprogression." The AUCs of the classifiers were 0.632-0.710 on the Raw dataset, were significantly higher with the use of SN at 0.784-0.854 (p < 0.001 for Raw versus SN), and higher still with SCN at 0.954-0.979 (p < 0.001 for SN versus SCN). Class activation maps of the SCN model visualized lesions contributing to the model's decision of progression.
conclusionWith preprocessing of spatial and count normalization, our deep learning model achieved excellent performance in classifying the therapeutic response of bone scans in patients with prostate cancer.
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.