Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40909977›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025

Diagnosis methods for pancreatic cancer with the technique of deep learning: a review and a meta-analysis.

Yuanbo Bi, Dongrui Li, Ruochen Pang, Chengxv Du, Da Li, Xiaoyv Zhao, Haitao Lv

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Yuanbo Bi *Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Dongrui Li *Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Ruochen PangDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Chengxv DuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Da LiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Xiaoyv ZhaoDepartment of Oncology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.
Haitao LvDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Early diagnosis can significantly improve survival rate of Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but due to the insidious and non-specific early symptoms, most patients are not suitable for surgery when diagnosed. Traditional imaging techniques and an increasing number of non-imaging diagnostic methods have been used for the early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) through deep learning (DL). Objective: This review summarizes diagnosis methods for pancreatic cancer with the technique of deep learning and looks forward to the future development directions of deep learning for early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Methods: This study follows the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, retrieving studies on deep learning for early pancreatic cancer diagnosis from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, IEEE, and Cochrane Library over the past 5 years. Inclusion criteria were studies involving PDAC patients, using deep learning algorithms for diagnosis evaluation, using histopathological results as the reference standard, and having sufficient data. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. Quality was assessed using QUADAS-2, with StataMP 17 for meta-analysis. Results: In this study, 422 articles were retrieved, and 7 were finally included for meta-analysis. The analysis showed that the accuracy of deep learning in the early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer was 80%-98.9%, and the combined sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.96), 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.96), and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98). The positive and negative likelihood ratio were 11.52 (95% CI, 6.15-21.55) and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.04-0.17). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography (CE-CT) were the main diagnostic methods. Non-imaging diagnostic methods such as deep learning urine markers, disease trajectory also performed good diagnostic potential. Conclusions: Artificial intelligence (AI) technology holds promise for clinical guidance in pancreatic cancer risk prediction and diagnosis. Future research may focus on leveraging diverse data sources like genomics and biomarkers through deep learning; utilizing multi - center or international samples; tackling the challenge of early diagnosis for small pancreatic cancers; enhancing the explainability of AI models and multi-modal approaches.

Indexed as

deep learningdiagnosis methodsmeta-analysispancreatic cancer (PC)research trends

Identifiers

PMID40909977
PMCPMC12404995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.