Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38095766›Full record

Trial reportGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2024

Diagnosing and grading gastric atrophy and intestinal metaplasia using semi-supervised deep learning on pathological images: development and validation study.

Shuangshuang Fang, Zhenyu Liu, Qi Qiu, Zhenchao Tang, Yang Yang, Zhongsheng Kuang, Xiaohua Du, Shanshan Xiao, Yanyan Liu, Yuanbin Luo and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.5field-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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Artificial Intelligence for Endoscopic Diagnosis of Gastric Premalignant Lesions.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026
    Review
  4. Research progress of machine learning applications in gastric cancer diagnosis and therapy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Gastric intestinal metaplasia: Management and surveillance strategies.World journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Shuangshuang Fang *Beijing Key Laboratory of Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders Diagnosis and Treatment of Traditional Chinese Medicine; Department of Gastroenterology, Wangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, No. 6, Zhonghuan South Road, Wangjing, Beijing, 100102, China.
Zhenyu Liu *CAS Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China.
Qi Qiu *CAS Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China.
Zhenchao Tang *Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Big Data-Based Precision Medicine, School of Engineering Medicine, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, China.
Yang YangBeijing Key Laboratory of Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders Diagnosis and Treatment of Traditional Chinese Medicine; Department of Gastroenterology, Wangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, No. 6, Zhonghuan South Road, Wangjing, Beijing, 100102, China.
Zhongsheng KuangDepartment of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Xiaohua DuDepartment of Pathology, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Shanshan XiaoDepartment of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Yanyan LiuDepartment of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Yuanbin LuoDepartment of Pathology, Gansu Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730050, China.
Liping GuDepartment of Pathology, Gansu Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730050, China.
Li TianDepartment of Pathology, Gansu Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730050, China.
Xiaoxia LiangDepartment of Pathology, Shanxi Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Taiyuan, 030012, China.
Guiling FanDepartment of Pathology, Shanxi Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Taiyuan, 030012, China.
Yu ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Shanxi Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Taiyuan, 030012, China.
Ping ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Wangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100102, China.
Weixun ZhouDepartment of Pathology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, 100730, China.
Xiuli LiuDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, 98195, USA.
Jie TianCAS Key Laboratory of Molecular Imaging, Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China.
Wei WeiBeijing Key Laboratory of Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders Diagnosis and Treatment of Traditional Chinese Medicine; Department of Gastroenterology, Wangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, No. 6, Zhonghuan South Road, Wangjing, Beijing, 100102, China. weiwei3816@mail.cintcm.ac.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-6259-6386
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNGansu Provincial Hospital · CNShanxi Province Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNChinese Academy of Sciences · CNBeihang University · CNGuangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNWashington University in St. Louis · USXidian University · CN

Funding

National Traditional Chinese Medicine Inheritance and Innovation Team Project ZYYCXTD-C-202210Science and Technology Innovative Research Team in Higher Educational Institutions of Hunan Province 201507001-09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePatients with gastric atrophy and intestinal metaplasia (IM) were at risk for gastric cancer, necessitating an accurate risk assessment. We aimed to establish and validate a diagnostic approach for gastric biopsy specimens using deep learning and OLGA/OLGIM for individual gastric cancer risk classification.

methodsIn this study, we prospectively enrolled 545 patients suspected of atrophic gastritis during endoscopy from 13 tertiary hospitals between December 22, 2017, to September 25, 2020, with a total of 2725 whole-slide images (WSIs). Patients were randomly divided into a training set (n = 349), an internal validation set (n = 87), and an external validation set (n = 109). Sixty patients from the external validation set were randomly selected and divided into two groups for an observer study, one with the assistance of algorithm results and the other without. We proposed a semi-supervised deep learning algorithm to diagnose and grade IM and atrophy, and we compared it with the assessments of 10 pathologists. The model's performance was evaluated based on the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and weighted kappa value.

resultsThe algorithm, named GasMIL, was established and demonstrated encouraging performance in diagnosing IM (AUC 0.884, 95% CI 0.862-0.902) and atrophy (AUC 0.877, 95% CI 0.855-0.897) in the external test set. In the observer study, GasMIL achieved an 80% sensitivity, 85% specificity, a weighted kappa value of 0.61, and an AUC of 0.953, surpassing the performance of all ten pathologists in diagnosing atrophy. Among the 10 pathologists, GasMIL's AUC ranked second in OLGA (0.729, 95% CI 0.625-0.833) and fifth in OLGIM (0.792, 95% CI 0.688-0.896). With the assistance of GasMIL, pathologists demonstrated improved AUC (p = 0.013), sensitivity (p = 0.014), and weighted kappa (p = 0.016) in diagnosing IM, and improved specificity (p = 0.007) in diagnosing atrophy compared to pathologists working alone.

conclusionGasMIL shows the best overall performance in diagnosing IM and atrophy when compared to pathologists, significantly enhancing their diagnostic capabilities.

Indexed as

Deep LearningGastritis, AtrophicStomach NeoplasmsAtrophyBiopsyGastroscopyHumansMetaplasiaRisk FactorsAtrophic gastritisDiagnoseSemi-supervised deep learningThe operative link for gastric intestinal metaplasia assessmentThe operative link for gastritis assessment

Identifiers

PMID38095766
PMCPMC10896941
OpenAlexW4389738815

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.