Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38686219›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024

Development and validation of an artificial intelligence-based model for detecting urothelial carcinoma using urine cytology images: a multicentre, diagnostic study with prospective validation.

Shaoxu Wu, Runnan Shen, Guibin Hong, Yun Luo, Huan Wan, Jiahao Feng, Zeshi Chen, Fan Jiang, Yun Wang, Chengxiao Liao and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

20 authors.

Shaoxu WuDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Runnan ShenDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Guibin HongDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Yun LuoDepartment of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Huan WanDepartment of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Jiahao FengCellsVision Medical Technology Services Co., Ltd., Guangzhou, China.
Zeshi ChenDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Fan JiangDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Yun WangDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Chengxiao LiaoDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaoyang LiDepartment of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Bohao LiuDepartment of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaowei HuangCellsVision Medical Technology Services Co., Ltd., Guangzhou, China.
Kai LiuCellsVision Medical Technology Services Co., Ltd., Guangzhou, China.
Ping QinDepartment of Pathology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Yahui WangDepartment of Urology, The Shen-Shan Central Hospital, Shanwei, China.
Ye XieDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Nengtai OuyangDepartment of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Jian HuangDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Tianxin LinDepartment of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Urine cytology is an important non-invasive examination for urothelial carcinoma (UC) diagnosis and follow-up. We aimed to explore whether artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance the sensitivity of urine cytology and help avoid unnecessary endoscopy. Methods: In this multicentre diagnostic study, consecutive patients who underwent liquid-based urine cytology examinations at four hospitals in China were included for model development and validation. Patients who declined surgery and lacked associated histopathology results, those diagnosed with rare subtype tumours of the urinary tract, or had low-quality images were excluded from the study. All liquid-based cytology slides were scanned into whole-slide images (WSIs) at 40 × magnification and the WSI-labels were derived from the corresponding histopathology results. The Precision Urine Cytology AI Solution (PUCAS) was composed of three distinct stages (patch extraction, features extraction, and classification diagnosis) and was trained to identify important WSI features associated with UC diagnosis. The diagnostic sensitivity was mainly used to validate the performance of PUCAS in retrospective and prospective validation cohorts. This study is registered with the ChiCTR, ChiCTR2300073192. Findings: Between January 1, 2018 and October 31, 2022, 2641 patients were retrospectively recruited in the training cohort, and 2335 in retrospective validation cohorts; 400 eligible patients were enrolled in the prospective validation cohort between July 7, 2023 and September 15, 2023. The sensitivity of PUCAS ranged from 0.922 (95% CI: 0.811-0.978) to 1.000 (0.782-1.000) in retrospective validation cohorts, and was 0.896 (0.837-0.939) in prospective validation cohort. The PUCAS model also exhibited a good performance in detecting malignancy within atypical urothelial cells cases, with a sensitivity of over 0.84. In the recurrence detection scenario, PUCAS could reduce 57.5% of endoscopy use with a negative predictive value of 96.4%. Interpretation: PUCAS may help to improve the sensitivity of urine cytology, reduce misdiagnoses of UC, avoid unnecessary endoscopy, and reduce the clinical burden in resource-limited areas. The further validation in other countries is needed. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China; Key Program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China; the National Science Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholars; the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province; the National Key Research and Development Programme of China; Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Centre for Urological Diseases.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceMulticentre studyProspective validationUrine cytologyUrothelial carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID38686219
PMCPMC11056596

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.