ArticleArtificial intelligence in medicine2025
Concordance-based Predictive Uncertainty (CPU)-Index: Proof-of-concept with application towards improved specificity of lung cancers on low dose screening CT.
Article in Artificial intelligence in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk prediction for lung cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-regression.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of deep learning-assisted low-dose CT screening for lung cancer detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for the Diagnosis and Management of Cancers: Potentials and Challenges.MedComm · 2025Review
- Utility of Artificial Intelligence for Decision Making in Thoracic Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce a novel concordance-based predictive uncertainty (CPU)-Index, which integrates insights from subgroup analysis and personalized AI time-to-event models. Through its application in refining lung cancer screening (LCS) predictions generated by an individualized AI time-to-event model trained with fused data of low dose CT (LDCT) radiomics with patient demographics, we demonstrate its effectiveness, resulting in improved risk assessment compared to the Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System (Lung-RADS). Subgroup-based Lung-RADS faces challenges in representing individual variations and relies on a limited set of predefined characteristics, resulting in variable predictions. Conversely, personalized AI time-to-event models are hindered by transparency issues and biases from censored data. By measuring the prediction consistency between subgroup analysis and AI time-to-event models, the CPU-Index framework offers a nuanced evaluation of the bias-variance trade-off and improves the transparency and reliability of predictions. Consistency was estimated by the concordance index of subgroup analysis-based similarity rank and model prediction similarity rank. Subgroup analysis-based similarity loss was defined as the sum-of-the-difference between Lung-RADS and feature-level 0-1 loss. Model prediction similarity loss was defined as squared loss. To test our approach, we identified 3,326 patients who underwent LDCT for LCS from 1/1/2015 to 6/30/2020 with confirmation of lung cancer on pathology within one year. For each LDCT image, the lesion associated with a Lung-RADS score was detected using a pretrained deep learning model from Medical Open Network for AI (MONAI), from which radiomic features were extracted. Radiomics were optimally fused with patient demographics via a positional encoding scheme and used to train a neural multi-task logistic regression time-to-event model that predicts malignancy. Performance was maximized when radiomics features were fused with positionally encoded demographic features. In this configuration, our algorithm raised the AUC from 0.81 ± 0.04 to 0.89 ± 0.02. Compared to standard Lung-RADS, our approach reduced the False-Positive-Rate from 0.41 ± 0.02 to 0.30 ± 0.12 while maintaining the same False-Negative-Rate. Our methodology enhances lung cancer risk assessment by estimating prediction uncertainty and adjusting accordingly. Furthermore, the optimal integration of radiomics and patient demographics improved overall diagnostic performance, indicating their complementary nature.
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.