Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38802547›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Multiphase comparative study for WHO/ISUP nuclear grading diagnostic model based on enhanced CT images of clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Chenyang Lu, Yangyang Xia, Jiamin Han, Wei Chen, Xu Qiao, Rui Gao, Xuewen Jiang

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Chenyang LuSchool of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100, People's Republic of China.
Yangyang XiaKey Laboratory of Urinary Precision Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Urology, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, People's Republic of China.
Jiamin HanSchool of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100, People's Republic of China.
Wei ChenDepartment of Radiology, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Taian, People's Republic of China.
Xu QiaoSchool of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100, People's Republic of China. qiaoxu@sdu.edu.cn.
Rui GaoSchool of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, 250100, People's Republic of China. gaorui@sdu.edu.cn.
Xuewen JiangKey Laboratory of Urinary Precision Diagnosis and Treatment, Department of Urology, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, People's Republic of China. xwjiang1988@126.com.

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province ZR2021MF057Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province ZR2021QF042
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare and analyze the diagnostic value of different enhancement stages in distinguishing low and high nuclear grade clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) based on enhanced computed tomography (CT) images by building machine learning classifiers. A total of 51 patients (Dateset1, including 41 low-grade and 10 high-grade) and 27 patients (Independent Dateset2, including 16 low-grade and 11 high-grade) with pathologically proven ccRCC were enrolled in this retrospective study. Radiomic features were extracted from the corticomedullary phase (CMP), nephrographic phase (NP), and excretory phase (EP) CT images, and selected using the recursive feature elimination cross-validation (RFECV) algorithm, the group differences were assessed using T-test and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. The support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), XGBoost (XGB), VGG11, ResNet18, and GoogLeNet classifiers are established to distinguish low-grade and high-grade ccRCC. The classifiers based on CT images of NP (Dateset1, RF: AUC = 0.82 ± 0.05, ResNet18: AUC = 0.81 ± 0.02; Dateset2, XGB: AUC = 0.95 ± 0.02, ResNet18: AUC = 0.87 ± 0.07) obtained the best performance and robustness in distinguishing low-grade and high-grade ccRCC, while the EP-based classifier performance in poorer results. The CT images of enhanced phase NP had the best performance in diagnosing low and high nuclear grade ccRCC. Firstorder_Kurtosis and firstorder_90Percentile feature play a vital role in the classification task.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsNeoplasm GradingTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSupport Vector MachineClear-cell renal cell carcinomaEnhanced computed tomographyMachine learningWHO/ISUP nuclear grade

Identifiers

PMID38802547
PMCPMC11130204

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.