ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Development and validation of an AI-driven radiomics model using non-enhanced CT for automated severity grading in chronic pancreatitis.
Article in European radiology, 2025. 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.
- Artificial intelligence in chronic and autoimmune pancreatitis: diagnosis, prognosis, and personalized management.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Advancing Gene Therapy for Pancreatitis: From Genetic Insights to Clinical Translation.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
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
objectiveTo develop and validate the chronic pancreatitis CT severity model (CATS), an artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool leveraging automated 3D segmentation and radiomics analysis of non-enhanced CT scans for objective severity stratification in chronic pancreatitis (CP). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study encompassed patients with recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) and CP from June 2016 to May 2020. A 3D convolutional neural network segmented non-enhanced CT scans, extracting 1843 radiomic features to calculate the radiomics score (Rad-score). The CATS was formulated using multivariable logistic regression and validated in a subsequent cohort from June 2020 to April 2023.
resultsOverall, 2054 patients with RAP and CP were included in the training (n = 927), validation set (n = 616), and external test (n = 511) sets. CP grade I and II patients accounted for 300 (14.61%) and 1754 (85.39%), respectively. The Rad-score significantly correlated with the acinus-to-stroma ratio (p = 0.023; OR, -2.44). The CATS model demonstrated high discriminatory performance in differentiating CP severity grades, achieving an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.98) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81-0.90) in the validation and test cohorts. CATS-predicted grades correlated with exocrine insufficiency (all p < 0.05) and showed significant prognostic differences (all p < 0.05). CATS outperformed radiologists in detecting calcifications, identifying all minute calcifications missed by radiologists.
conclusionThe CATS, developed using non-enhanced CT and AI, accurately predicts CP severity, reflects disease morphology, and forecasts short- to medium-term prognosis, offering a significant advancement in CP management. KEY POINTS: Question Existing CP severity assessments rely on semi-quantitative CT evaluations and multi-modality imaging, leading to inconsistency and inaccuracy in early diagnosis and prognosis prediction. Findings The AI-driven CATS model, using non-enhanced CT, achieved high accuracy in grading CP severity, and correlated with histopathological fibrosis markers. Clinical relevance CATS provides a cost-effective, widely accessible tool for precise CP severity stratification, enabling early intervention, personalized management, and improved outcomes without contrast agents or invasive biopsies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40536703What 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.