ArticleNPJ precision oncology2024
Predicting prognosis for epithelial ovarian cancer patients receiving bevacizumab treatment with CT-based deep learning.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parameter efficient fine-tunning of foundation model to facilitate tumor response prediction for ovarian cancer patients.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- mpMRI-based habitat analysis for predicting prognoses in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: a multicenter study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Radiology-based artificial intelligence for predicting targeted therapy response in pan-cancer: a comprehensive review.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- CT radiomic stratification signature to optimize clinical decisions for ovarian cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the underlying biological basis: a multicenter retrospective study.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Non-Invasive Tumor Budding Evaluation and Correlation with Treatment Response in Bladder Cancer: A Multi-Center Cohort Study.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Benchmarking histopathology foundation models for ovarian cancer bevacizumab treatment response prediction from whole slide images.Discover oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) presents considerable difficulties in prognostication and treatment strategy development. Bevacizumab, an anti-angiogenic medication, has demonstrated potential in enhancing progression-free survival (PFS) in EOC patients. Nevertheless, the identification of individuals at elevated risk of disease progression following treatment remains a challenging task. This study was to develop and validate a deep learning (DL) model using retrospectively collected computed tomography (CT) plain scans of inoperable and recurrent EOC patients receiving bevacizumab treatment diagnosed between January 2013 and January 2024. A total of 525 patients from three different institutions were retrospectively included in the study and divided into training set (N = 400), internal test set (N = 97) and external test set (N = 28). The model's performance was evaluated using Harrell's C-index. Patients were categorized into high-risk and low-risk group based on a predetermined cutoff in the training set. Additionally, a multimodal model was evaluated, incorporating the risk score generated by the DL model and the pretreatment level of carbohydrate antigen 125 as input variables. The Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI) metric quantified the reclassification performance of our optimal model in comparison to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging model. The results indicated that DL model achieved a PFS predictive C-index of 0.73 in the internal test set and a C-index of 0.61 in the external test set, along with hazard ratios of 34.24 in the training set (95% CI: 21.7, 54.1; P < 0.001) and 8.16 in the internal test set (95% CI: 2.5, 26.8; P < 0.001). The multimodal model demonstrated a C-index of 0.76 in the internal test set and a C-index of 0.64 in the external test set. Comparative analysis against FIGO staging revealed an NRI of 0.06 (P < 0.001) for the multimodal model. The model presents opportunities for prognostic assessment, treatment strategizing, and ongoing patient monitoring.
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.