Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39022278›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024

Construction and validation of a risk score system for diagnosing invasive adenocarcinoma presenting as pulmonary pure ground-glass nodules: a multi-center cohort study in China.

Qingcheng Meng, Changbao Zheng, Lanwei Guo, Pengrui Gao, Wentao Liu, Hong Ge, Tong Liu, Hui Peng, Jie Lu, Xuejun Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Qingcheng Meng *Department of Radiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Changbao Zheng *Department of Radiology, The Hainan Cancer Hospital, Haikou, China.
Lanwei GuoHenan Office for Cancer Control and Research, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Pengrui GaoDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Wentao LiuDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Hong GeDepartment of Radiotherapy, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Tong LiuDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Hui PengDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.
Jie LuDepartment of Radiology, The People's Hospital of Xingyang Country, Zhengzhou, China.
Xuejun ChenDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Anxiety-driven clinical interventions have been queried due to the nondeterminacy of pure ground-glass nodules (pGGNs). Although radiomics and radiogenomics aid diagnosis, standardization and reproducibility challenges persist. We aimed to assess a risk score system for invasive adenocarcinoma in pGGNs. Methods: In a retrospective, multi-center study, 772 pGGNs from 707 individuals in The Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University & Henan Cancer Hospital were grouped into training (509 patients with 558 observations) and validation (198 patients with 214 observations) sets consecutively from January 2017 to November 2021. An additional test set of 143 observations in Hainan Cancer Hospital was analyzed in the same period. Computed tomography (CT) signs and clinical features were manually collected, and the quantitative parameters were achieved by artificial intelligence (AI). The positive cutoff score was ≥3. Risk scores system 3 combined carcinoma history, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), maximum diameters, nodule volume, mean CT values, type II or III vascular supply signs, and other radiographic characteristics. The evaluation included the area under the curves (AUCs), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) for both the risk score systems 1, 2, 3 and the AI model. Results: The risk score system 3 [AUC, 0.840; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.789-0.890] outperformed the AI model (AUC, 0.553; 95% CI: 0.487-0.619), risk score system 1 (AUC, 0.802; 95% CI: 0.754-0.851), and risk score system 2 (AUC, 0.816; 95% CI: 0.766-0.867), with 88.0% (0.850-0.904) accuracy, 95.6% (0.932-0.972) PPV, 0.620 (0.535-0.702) NPV, 89.6% (0.864-0.920) sensitivity, and 80.6% (0.717-0.872) specificity in the training sets. In the validation and test sets, risk score system 3 performed best with AUCs of 0.769 (0.678-0.860) and 0.801 (0.669-0.933). Conclusions: An AI-based risk scoring system using quantitative image parameters, clinical features, and radiographic characteristics effectively predicts invasive adenocarcinoma in pulmonary pGGNs.

Indexed as

artificial intelligence (AI)computed tomography (CT)lung cancerPure ground-glass nodule (pGGN)X-ray

Identifiers

PMID39022278
PMCPMC11250337

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.