ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2026
Construction and validation of deep learning-based pathomics signature model for predicting postoperative recurrence of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study developed an attention-based multi-instance deep convolutional neural network (CRPNet) for the early prediction of postoperative recurrence in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). The model was trained on 183 whole slide images (WSIs) from ccRCC patients and validated on an internal cohort of 75 WSIs. Its prognostic performance was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, false positive/negative rates (FPR/FNR), C-index, and hazard ratio (HR), and was compared against established tools including the UISS, SSIGN, and Karakiewicz nomograms. Results demonstrated that CRPNet-stratified high-risk groups had significantly poorer prognosis in both training and validation sets (P < 0.001), with consistency across subgroups based on T-stage, WHO/ISUP grade, and necrosis. In the training cohort, CRPNet achieved an AUC of 0.994 (95% CI: 0.974-1.000), accuracy of 97.70%, precision/recall of 95.56%, FPR of 1.55%, and FNR of 4.45%. In the validation cohort, it maintained an AUC of 0.879 (95% CI: 0.783-0.943), accuracy of 88.00%, precision of 85.71%, recall of 63.16%, FPR of 0%, and FNR of 36.84%, outperforming all comparator models. CRPNet also yielded a superior C-index compared to clinical parameters and traditional nomograms, and exhibited the highest HR (12.078, 95% CI: 1.611-90.539). In conclusion, CRPNet surpasses conventional prognostic models in recurrence prediction accuracy, AUC, precision, C-index, and risk stratification, while demonstrating lower FPR and FNR, thereby offering improved prognostication for metastatic ccRCC.
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.