Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41026592›Full record

ArticleJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2026

Artificial Intelligence Model for Imaging-Based Extranodal Extension Detection and Outcome Prediction in Human Papillomavirus-Positive Oropharyngeal Cancer.

Gabriel S Dayan, Gautier Hénique, Houda Bahig, Kristoff Nelson, Coralie Brodeur, Apostolos Christopoulos, Edith Filion, Phuc-Felix Nguyen-Tan, Brian O'Sullivan, Tareck Ayad and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Decoding the Black Box in Deep Learning Models-Reply.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

16 authors.

Gabriel S DayanDivision of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Gautier HéniqueResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Houda BahigResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Kristoff NelsonDivision of Radiology, Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Coralie BrodeurResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Apostolos ChristopoulosDivision of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Edith FilionDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Phuc-Felix Nguyen-TanDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Brian O'SullivanResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Tareck AyadDivision of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Eric BissadaDivision of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Paul TabetDivision of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Louis GuertinDivision of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Antoine DesiletsResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Samuel KadouryResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Laurent Letourneau-GuillonResearch Center of CHUM, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Although not included in the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System, there is growing evidence suggesting that imaging-based extranodal extension (iENE) is associated with worse outcomes in HPV-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC). Key challenges with iENE include the lack of standardized criteria, reliance on radiological expertise, and interreader variability. Objective: To develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven pipeline for lymph node segmentation and iENE classification using pretreatment computed tomography (CT) scans, and to evaluate its association with oncologic outcomes in HPV-positive OPC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-center cohort study conducted at a tertiary oncology center in Montreal, Canada, of adult patients with HPV-positive cN+ OPC treated with up-front (chemo)radiotherapy from January 2009 to January 2020. Participants were followed up until January 2024. Data analysis was performed from March 2024 to April 2025. Exposures: Pretreatment planning CT scans along with lymph node gross tumor volume segmentations performed by expert radiation oncologists were extracted. For lymph node segmentation, an nnU-Net model was developed. For iENE classification, radiomic and deep learning feature extraction methods were compared. Main Outcomes and Measures: iENE classification accuracy was assessed against 2 expert neuroradiologist evaluations using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Subsequently, the association of AI-predicted iENE with oncologic outcomes-ie, overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant control (DC), and locoregional control (LRC)-was assessed. Results: Among 397 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.3 [9.1] years; 80 females [20.2%] and 317 males [79.8%]), AI-iENE classification using radiomics achieved an AUC of 0.81. Patients with AI-predicted iENE had worse 3-year OS (83.8% vs 96.8%), RFS (80.7% vs 93.7%), and DC (84.3% vs 97.1%), but similar LRC. AI-iENE had significantly higher Concordance indices than radiologist-assessed iENE for OS (0.64 vs 0.55), RFS (0.67 vs 0.60), and DC (0.79 vs 0.68). In multivariable analysis, AI-iENE remained independently associated with OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.82; 95% CI, 1.21-6.57), RFS (aHR, 4.20; 95% CI, 1.93-9.11), and DC (aHR, 12.33; 95% CI, 4.15-36.67), adjusting for age, tumor category, node category, and number of lymph nodes. Conclusions and Relevance: This single-center cohort study found that an AI-driven pipeline can successfully automate lymph node segmentation and iENE classification from pretreatment CT scans in HPV-associated OPC. Predicted iENE was independently associated with worse oncologic outcomes. External validation is required to assess generalizability and the potential for implementation in institutions without specialized imaging expertise.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceExtranodal ExtensionOropharyngeal NeoplasmsPapillomavirus InfectionsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHuman Papillomavirus VirusesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID41026592
PMCPMC12486138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.