ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Development and validation of an interpretable CT-based scoring model for gastric cancer aggressiveness.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAccurate prediction of adverse histopathological status (AHS) in gastric cancer (GC) is clinically crucial due to its strong association with poor prognosis. This study aims to develop and validate a CT-based machine learning model for AHS prediction, and establish an interpretable imaging score (I-score) for prognostic stratification.
methodsIn this dual-center retrospective study, 1164 GC patients undergoing radical gastrectomy between 2014 and 2023 were included. Four semantic CT features, including clinical lymph node status (cN), longest diameter (LD), tumor thickness (TT), and serosal status, were independently evaluated by radiologists. Radiomic features were extracted from arterial and portal venous phase volumes of interest. Logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) models were trained to predict AHS. The best-performing model was used to construct the I-score, which was validated in an independent cohort for prognostic assessment.
resultsAmong the 1164 patients (median age: 62 years old; 847 men, 317 women), data were divided into training (n = 396), test (n = 618), and validation (n = 150) cohorts. The XGBoost model using semantic features achieved the highest predictive performance (AUC: 0.803, 0.848 and 0.764, respectively). The derived I-score stratified patients into low-risk (43%) and high-risk (57%) groups, with significantly poorer 1000-day overall survival in the high-risk group (55.7% vs. 73.8%, p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox analysis confirmed the I-score as an independent prognostic factor (HR = 1.02, p = 0.004).
conclusionThe simplified CT-based machine learning model using semantic imaging features achieved high predictive performance for AHS in GC. The interpretable I-score enables effective preoperative risk stratification and individualized treatment planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41803545What 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.