Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38745770›Full record

ReviewExploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy2024

Artificial intelligence and classification of mature lymphoid neoplasms.

Joaquim Carreras, Rifat Hamoudi, Naoya Nakamura

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

3 authors.

Joaquim CarrerasDepartment of Pathology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara 259-1193, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6129-8299
Rifat HamoudiDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 27272, United Arab Emirates.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1402-0868
Naoya NakamuraDepartment of Pathology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara 259-1193, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4332-5254

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hematologists, geneticists, and clinicians came to a multidisciplinary agreement on the classification of lymphoid neoplasms that combines clinical features, histological characteristics, immunophenotype, and molecular pathology analyses. The current classification includes the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues revised 4th edition, the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of mature lymphoid neoplasms (report from the Clinical Advisory Committee 2022), and the 5th edition of the proposed WHO Classification of haematolymphoid tumours (lymphoid neoplasms, WHO-HAEM5). This article revises the recent advances in the classification of mature lymphoid neoplasms. Artificial intelligence (AI) has advanced rapidly recently, and its role in medicine is becoming more important as AI integrates computer science and datasets to make predictions or classifications based on complex input data. Summarizing previous research, it is described how several machine learning and neural networks can predict the prognosis of the patients, and classified mature B-cell neoplasms. In addition, new analysis predicted lymphoma subtypes using cell-of-origin markers that hematopathologists use in the clinical routine, including

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceartificial neural networksdeep learninggene expressionmachine learningnon-Hodgkin lymphomaspan-cancer seriesprognosis

Identifiers

PMID38745770
PMCPMC11090685

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.