ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Machine learning models from computed tomography to diagnose thymic epithelial tumors requiring combined resection.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bibliometric analysis reveals global thymoma research trends collaborations and emerging frontiers from 2010 to 2024.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and prognosis of thymic epithelial tumors: a systematic review.Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Minimally invasive approaches have been a standard choice of surgery for noninvasive thymic epithelial tumors (TETs), but we sometimes experience cases requiring combined resection of adjacent structures. We develop and validate machine learning models to predict combined resection based on preoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT). Methods: This study included 212 patients with TETs (140 in the training cohort and 72 in the validation cohort) who underwent radical surgery. Radiomics features were extracted from contrast-enhanced CT and predicted with five feature selection methods and seven machine learning models in nested cross validation. The clinical utility of the models was analyzed by a decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Fifty-five patients in the training cohort and 28 in the validation cohort required combined resection. The classifiers random forest (RF), gradient boosting (GB), and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) indicated high predictive performance, with the XGB classifier based on features selected by GB performing the best, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.797. In the validation cohort, the classifier had an AUC of 0.817. The DCA showed the validity of the model with a threshold range of 15-72%. When restricted to combined pulmonary and pericardial resection, the respective AUCs were 0.736 and 0.674 for the training cohort and 0.806 and 0.924 for the validation cohort. Conclusions: The machine learning model based on preoperative CT images was able to diagnose TETs requiring combined resection with high accuracy. The DCA demonstrated a wide range of model validity and may aid in surgical approach selection.
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.