ArticleThoracic cancer2024
Quantitative analysis of imaging characteristics in lung adenocarcinoma in situ using artificial intelligence.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 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.
- Development and validation of a nomogram for preoperative prediction of the invasiveness of stage T1 lung adenocarcinoma utilizing AI-driven radiomics.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Quantitative analysis of imaging characteristics in lung adenocarcinoma in situ using artificial intelligence.Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the rising incidence of pulmonary nodules (PNs), lung adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) is a critical early stage of lung cancer, necessitating accurate diagnosis for early intervention. This study applies artificial intelligence (AI) for quantitative imaging analysis to differentiate AIS from atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH) and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA), aiming to enhance clinical diagnosis and prevent misdiagnosis.
methodsThe study analyzed 1215 PNs with confirmed AAH, AIS, and MIA from six centers using the Shukun AI diagnostic module. Parameters evaluated included demographic data and various CT imaging metrics to identify indicators for clinical application, focusing on the mean CT value's predictive value.
resultsSignificant differences were found in several parameters between AAH and AIS, with nodule mass showing the highest predictive value. When comparing AIS to MIA, total nodule volume was the best predictor, followed by the maximum CT value.
conclusionThe mean CT value has limited discriminative power for AIS diagnosis. Instead, the maximum CT value and maximum 3D diameter are recommended for clinical differentiation. Nodule mass and volume of solid components are strong indicators for differentiating AIS from AAH and MIA, respectively.
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.