ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Machine Learning-Driven SERS Analysis Platform for Accurate and Rapid Diagnosis of Peritoneal Metastasis from Gastric Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Multimodal digital biopsy for preoperative prediction of occult peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
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
backgroundPeritoneal metastasis (PM) is the most common form of distant metastasis in gastric cancer and is a major cause of mortality. Current diagnostic approaches suffer from low sensitivity, time-consuming procedures, and cannot provide real-time diagnostic information. Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) combined with machine learning algorithms has emerged as a promising tool for cancer diagnosis. PATIENTS AND
methodsRaman spectra were collected from the peritoneal lavage fluid (PLF) of 120 patients with gastric cancer and analyzed using three machine learning models: principal component analysis-linear discriminant analysis (PCA-LDA), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, false positive rate, false negative rate, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to assess the diagnostic performance.
resultsThe accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of SERS analysis to determine PM with PCA-LDA were 95.7%, 87.0%, and 95.5%; with RF were 95.4%, 91.3%, and 96.0%; with SVM were 95.5%, 91.3%, and 96.0%. For exfoliative cytology, these parameters were 72.0%, 40.0%, and 100%. For computed tomography (CT) scan, these parameters were 72.5%, 57.9%, and 85.7%. In addition, the performance of these models (PCA-LDA, RF, and SVM) demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy, with area under the curve values of 96.9%, 92.1%, and 93.4%, respectively. The diagnostic performance of all models in diagnosing PM is significantly better than those of exfoliative cytology and CT imaging.
conclusionsThe integration of SERS with machine learning models provides a simple, convenient, and cost-effective tool for PLF, offering significant potential for improving the diagnosis of PM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40715625What 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.