ArticleNuclear medicine communications2025
Automatic Lugano staging for risk stratification in lymphoma: a multicenter PET radiomics and machine learning study with survival analysis.
Article in Nuclear medicine communications, 2025. 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.
- Enhanced Lymphoma Subtype Classification and Prognosis Using Machine Learning withNuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence reshaping the paradigm of hematologic malignancy diagnosis and treatment: From static assessment to dynamic precision management.Annals of hematology · 2026Review
- ¹⁸F-FDG PET radiomics and machine learning for virtual biopsy and treatment decisions in lymphoma: a multicenter study.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of reader experience on the time-saving potential of a novel computer-aided tool for Ann Arbor staging of pediatric hodgkin lymphoma.Frontiers in nuclear 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLymphoma staging plays a pivotal role in treatment planning and prognosis. Yet, it still relies on manual interpretation of PET/computed tomography (CT) images, which is time-consuming, subjective, and prone to variability. This study introduces a novel radiomics-based machine learning model for automated lymphoma staging to improve diagnostic accuracy and streamline clinical workflow.
methodsImaging data from 241 patients with histologically confirmed lymphoma were retrospectively analyzed. Radiomics features were extracted from segmented lymph nodes and extranodal lesions using PET/CT. Three machine learning classifiers (Logistic Regression, Random Forest, and XGBoost) were trained to distinguish between early-stage (I-II) and advanced-stage (III-IV) lymphoma. Model performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy together with survival analysis.
resultsAmong the three models evaluated, the logistic regression model incorporating both nodal and extranodal radiomic features performed the best, achieving an AUC of 0.87 and a sensitivity of 0.88 in the external validation cohort. Including extranodal features significantly improved classification accuracy compared to nodal-only models (AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.75). Survival analysis revealed advanced-stage patients had a fourfold higher mortality risk (hazard ratio: 0.22-0.26, P = 0.0036) and a median survival of 84 months. Key radiomic features, such as tumor shape irregularity and heterogeneity, were strongly associated with staging, aligning with Lugano criteria for extranodal spread.
conclusionThis study demonstrated the potential of PET radiomics features for automated Lugano staging. Adding extranodal features significantly improved staging accuracy and informed treatment.
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.