ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024
Association Between Body Composition and Survival in Patients With Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: An Automated Deep Learning Approach.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-Based Imaging Assessment of Body Composition in Oncology: A Step Toward Routine Clinical Practice Integration.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- CT Body Composition Changes Predict Survival in Immunotherapy-Treated Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Machine learning survival prediction in esophageal cancer using radiomics and body composition from pretreatment and follow-up T12-level computed tomography.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Impact of Preoperative Comprehensive Body Composition on Postoperative Outcomes in Patients with Esophageal Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBody composition (BC) may play a role in outcome prognostication in patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEAC). Artificial intelligence provides new possibilities to opportunistically quantify BC from computed tomography (CT) scans. We developed a deep learning (DL) model for fully automatic BC quantification on routine staging CTs and determined its prognostic role in a clinical cohort of patients with GEAC. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe developed and tested a DL model to quantify BC measures defined as subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and skeletal muscle on routine CT and investigated their prognostic value in a cohort of patients with GEAC using baseline, 3-6-month, and 6-12-month postoperative CTs. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and secondary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). Cox regression assessed the association between (1) BC at baseline and mortality and (2) the decrease in BC between baseline and follow-up scans and mortality/DFS.
resultsModel performance was high with Dice coefficients ≥0.94 ± 0.06. Among 299 patients with GEAC (age 63.0 ± 10.7 years; 19.4% female), 140 deaths (47%) occurred over a median follow-up of 31.3 months. At baseline, no BC measure was associated with DFS. Only a substantial decrease in VAT >70% after a 6- to 12-month follow-up was associated with mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.99 [95% CI, 1.18 to 3.34];
conclusionDL enables opportunistic estimation of BC from routine staging CT to quantify prognostic information. In patients with GEAC, only a substantial decrease of VAT 6-12 months postsurgery was an independent predictor for DFS beyond traditional risk factors, which may help to identify individuals at high risk who go otherwise unnoticed.
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.