ArticleBMC gastroenterology2024
Construction of a combined prognostic model for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma based on deep learning and digital pathology images.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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.
- Review
- The place of advanced machine learning techniques in building pancreatic adenocarcinoma survival and recurrence prognosis models.Frontiers in oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeep learning has made significant advancements in the field of digital pathology, and the integration of multiple models has further improved accuracy. In this study, we aimed to construct a combined prognostic model using deep learning-extracted features from digital pathology images of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) alongside clinical predictive indicators and to explore its prognostic value.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 142 postoperative pathologically confirmed PDAC cases. These cases were divided into training (n = 114) and testing sets (n = 28) at an 8:2 ratio. Tumor whole-slide imaging features were extracted and screened to construct a pathological risk model based on a pre-trained deep learning model. Clinical and pathological data from the training set were used to select independent predictive factors for PDAC and establish a clinical risk model using LASSO, univariate, and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Based on the pathological and clinical risk models, a combined model was developed. The Harrell concordance index (C-index) was computed to assess the predictive performance of each model for PDAC survival prognosis.
resultsFor the training and testing sets, the C-index values for the clinical risk model were 0.76 and 0.75, respectively; for the pathological risk model, they were 0.82 and 0.73, respectively; and for the combined model, they were 0.86 and 0.77, respectively. The combined model exhibited appropriate calibration at 1-, 3-, and 5-year time points, as well as a superior area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve and clinical net benefit compared to the single models.
conclusionsIntegrating the pathological and clinical risk models may provide a higher predictive value for survival prognosis.
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.