ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence based on imaging data for predicting distant metastasis of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Artificial intelligence for the prediction of synchronous and metachronous liver metastasis in colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Pooled it
- Attention-Enhanced ResNet-U-Net for Automated Colorectal Tumor Segmentation in CT Scans.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Overstaging of the mesorectal fascia following neoadjuvant therapy and its impact on therapeutic management: a single-center retrospective cohort study of 506 mesorectal fascia positive patients.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Improving early liver metastasis detection in colorectal cancer using a weighted ensemble of ResNet50 and swin transformer: a KHCC study.Frontiers in big data · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer is the third most common malignant tumor with the third highest incidence rate. Distant metastasis is the main cause of death in colorectal cancer patients. Early detection and prognostic prediction of colorectal cancer has improved with the widespread use of artificial intelligence technologies. Purpose: The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the accuracy and validity of AI-based imaging data for predicting distant metastasis in colorectal cancer patients. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to find relevant studies published up to January, 2024, in different databases. The quality of articles was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. The predictive value of AI-based imaging data for distant metastasis in colorectal cancer patients was assessed using pooled sensitivity, specificity. To explore the reasons for heterogeneity, subgroup analyses were performed using different covariates. Results: Seventeen studies were included in the systematic evaluation. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of AI-based imaging data for predicting distant metastasis in colorectal cancer patients were 0.86, 0.82, and 0.91. Based on QUADAS-2, risk of bias was detected in patient selection, diagnostic tests to be evaluated, and gold standard. Based on the results of subgroup analyses, found that the duration of follow-up, site of metastasis, etc. had a significant impact on the heterogeneity. Conclusion: Imaging data images based on artificial intelligence algorithms have good diagnostic accuracy for predicting distant metastasis in colorectal cancer patients and have potential for clinical application. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42024516063).
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.