ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2025
Harnessing Native-Resolution 2D Embeddings for Lung Cancer Classification: A Feasibility Study with the RAD-DINO Self-supervised Foundation Model.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Low‑dose CT (LDCT) screening reduces lung cancer mortality but yields high false‑positive findings, motivating practical AI that aligns with slice‑based clinical review. We evaluate a label‑efficient 2D pipeline that uses frozen RAD‑DINO embeddings from native‑resolution axial slices and a lightweight multilayer perceptron for patient‑level risk estimation via mean aggregation and isotonic calibration. Using the NLST CT arm with outcomes defined over a 0-24‑month window, we construct a fixed patient‑level split (one CT per patient; no cross‑split leakage) and perform 25 repeated imbalanced test draws (~ 6% prevalence) to approximate screening conditions. At screening prevalence, RAD‑DINO + MLP achieves PR‑AUC = 0.705 (calibrated; raw 0.554) and ROC‑AUC = 0.817 (raw; 0.736 calibrated), with improved probability reliability following calibration; operating points are selected on validation and reported on test. For secondary ablations only, a near‑balanced cohort (N = 1984) yields accuracy 0.966, precision 0.974, recall 0.973, F1 0.973, and ROC‑AUC 0.912. Beyond classification, retrieval with triplet‑fine‑tuned embeddings attains Precision@5 = 0.853. Interpretability analyses show that cancer cases sustain higher top‑k slice scores and that directional SHAP concentrates on a small subset of high‑probability slices; label‑colored t‑SNE provides qualitative views of embedding structure. Limitations include single‑cohort evaluation, lack of Lung‑RADS labels in public NLST, and a CXR → CT pretraining shift; future work will pursue external validation and CT‑native self‑supervised continuation. Overall, frozen 2D foundation embeddings provide a strong, transparent, and computationally practical starting point for LDCT screening workflows under realistic prevalence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41419702What 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.