ArticleCancer medicine2024
Development and validation of a hierarchical approach for lymphoma classification using immunohistochemical markers.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate lymphoma classification is critical for effective treatment and immunohistochemistry is a cost-effective and time-saving approach. Although several machine learning algorithms showed effective results, they focused on a specific task of classification but not the whole classification workflow, thus impractical to be applied in clinical settings. Thus, we aim to develop an effective and economic machine learning-assisted system that can streamline the lymphoma differential diagnostic workflow using EBER in situ hybridization and immunohistochemical markers.
methodsWe included pathological reports diagnosed as lymphomas from two cancer centers (Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute). We proposed a hierarchical approach that mimicked the human diagnostic process and employed simplified panels of markers to perform a series of interpretable classification. The diagnostic accuracy for lymphoma pathological subtypes and the markers saving ratio were investigated in both temporal independent population and external medical center.
resultsA total of 14,927 patients and corresponding immunohistochemical results from two cancer centers were included. The proposed system had high discriminative ability for differentiating lymphoma pathological subtypes (measured by mean AUC in three validation cohorts, non-Hodgkin and Hodgkin lymphoma: 0.959; non-Hodgkin subtypes: 0.983; B-lymphoma subtypes: 0.868; T-lymphoma subtypes: 0.962; DLBCL subtypes: 0.957). In addition, the system's well selected characteristics can contribute to the development of agreement on panels of markers for differential diagnosis and help minimize cost of immunohistochemical marker techniques (measured by marker saving ratio compared to real clinical settings, internal primary-stage cohort: 16.45% saved, p < 0.001; internal later-stage cohort: 21.73% saved, p < 0.001; external cohort: 3.67% saved, p < 0.001).
conclusionsMachine learning-based hierarchical system using EBER in situ hybridization and IHC markers was developed, which could streamline the workflow by sequentially determining each lymphoma pathological subtype. The proposed system proved to be effective and cost-saving in independent and external validation, thus could be adopted affordably in future clinical practice.
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.