ArticleBMC cancer2024
Whole slide image based prognosis prediction in rectal cancer using unsupervised artificial intelligence.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of artificial intelligence in analysis of endoscopic images to detect residual disease or regrowth in rectal patients with complete clinical response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence classification of rectal neoplasia by endoscopic fluorescence perfusion analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Auxiliary meta-learning strategy for cancer recognition: leveraging external data and optimized feature mapping.BMC cancer · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRectal cancer is a common cancer worldwide and lacks effective prognostic markers. The development of prognostic markers by computational pathology methods has attracted increasing attention. This paper aims to construct a prognostic signature from whole slide images for predicting progression-free survival (PFS) of rectal cancer through an unsupervised artificial intelligence algorithm.
methodsA total of 238 patients with rectal cancer from two datasets were collected for the development and validation of the prognostic signature. A tumor detection model was built by transfer learning. Then, on the basis of the tumor patches recognized by the tumor detection model, a convolutional autoencoder model was built for decoding the tumor patches into deep latent features. Next, on the basis of the deep latent features, the tumor patches were divided into different clusters. The cluster number and other hyperparameters were optimized by a nested cross-validation method. The percentage of each cluster from the patient's tumor patches, which is hereafter called PCF, was calculated for prognostic signature construction. The prognostic signature was constructed by Cox proportional hazard regression with L2 regularization. Finally, bioinformatic analysis was performed to explore the underlying biological mechanisms of the PCFs.
resultsThe accuracy of the tumor detection model in distinguishing tumor patches from non-tumor patches achieved 99.3%. The optimal cluster number was determined to be 9. Therfore, 9 PCFs were calculated to construct the prognostic signature. The prognostic signature achieved a concordance index of 0.701 in the validation cohort. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed the prognostic signature had good risk stratification ability. Through the bioinformatic analysis, several PCF-associated genes were identified. These genes were enriched in various gene ontology terms.
conclusionThe developed prognostic signature can effectively predict PFS in patients with rectal cancer and exploration of the underlying biological mechanisms may help to promote its clinical translation.
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.