ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Exploring the optimal threshold of 3D consolidation tumor ratio value segmentation based on artificial intelligence for predicting the invasive degree of T1 lung adenocarcinoma.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 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
- The value of relative CT attenuation in predicting invasiveness in patients with T1-stage lung adenocarcinoma.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Threshold optimization in AI chest radiography analysis: integrating real-world data and clinical subgroups.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Identification of the optimal threshold for predicting the infiltration degree of T1-stage lung adenocarcinoma using solid component volume and three-dimensional consolidation-to-tumor ratio in threshold segmentation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The assessment of lung adenocarcinoma significantly depends on the proportion of solid components in lung nodules. Traditional one-dimensional consolidation tumor ratio (1D CTR) based on ideal, uniformly dense solid components lacks precision. There is no consensus on the CT threshold for evaluating invasiveness using the threshold segmentation method. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of the three-dimensional CTR (3D CTR) calculated by the artificial intelligence threshold segmentation method in predicting invasive stage T1 lung adenocarcinoma and to identify its optimal threshold and cut-off point. Methods: Data from 1,056 patients with 1,179 pulmonary nodules confirmed by postoperative pathology were collected retrospectively from two centers, Zhengzhou People's Hospital and Huadong Hospital of Fudan University. Patients were divided into non-invasive [atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH), adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA)] and invasive groups [invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC)]. Seven computed tomography (CT) threshold settings (-550 to 0 HU) were used to calculate the 3D CTR via the threshold segmentation method, and differences between the groups were analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to compare predictive performance for invasiveness of stage T1 lung adenocarcinoma, and the optimal threshold and corresponding cut-off value were determined. Subgroup analyses based on nodule size-T1a (≤10 mm), T1b (>10 to 20 mm), and T1c (>20 to 30 mm)-were also conducted. Results: The CT threshold of -150 Housefield unit (HU) showed the highest predictive efficacy for invasiveness of stage T1 lung adenocarcinoma, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.901 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.883-0.919], sensitivity of 86.878%, and specificity of 77.883%. The optimal cut-off point for 3D CTR was 2.75%. In subgroup analyses, -150 HU remained optimal, with predictive performance increasing with nodule size. For the T1a group, the AUC was 0.887 (95% CI: 0.885-0.919), cut-off value was 2.75%, sensitivity was 77.620%, and specificity was 85.714%. For the T1b group, values were 0.903 (95% CI: 0.875-0.931), cut-off value was 5.4%, sensitivity was 87.671%, and specificity was 80.296%. For the T1c group, values were 0.928 (95% CI: 0.893-0.963), cut-off value was 7.1%, sensitivity was 88.043%, and specificity was 81.176%. Conclusions: This study suggests that setting the CT threshold at -150 HU and using the AI-based threshold segmentation method to calculate the 3D CTR effectively distinguishes whether stage T1 lung adenocarcinoma is invasive, with an optimal cut-off point at 2.75%. Under this threshold, for varying nodule sizes, criteria are proposed: for nodules ≤10 mm with a 3D CTR <2.75%; >10 to 20 mm with a 3D CTR <5.4%; and >20 to 30 mm with a 3D CTR <7.1%, these partially solid nodules can be treated as non-IAC.
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.