ArticlePloS one2026
Accuracy and reproducibility of tumor size measurement using a deep-learning-based CDSS in resected lung cancer.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMONCAD LCT is a commercially available deep-learning based clinical decision support system (CDSS) for lung screening CT. The aim of this multicenter retrospective study was to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of tumor size measurement using a commercially available deep-learning-based clinical decision support system (CDSS), compared with radiologist assessments and pathological reference in resected lung cancer cases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively collected preoperative CT images and original radiology reports and the CDSS results for resected lung cancer from three institutions during 2022 (n = 176). MONCAD LCT evaluated the LungRADs category based on the density and size of the lung nodule. First of all, we compared the MONCAD LCT and original radiologic report using the pathologic tumor size as gold standard. Furthermore, the subsampling case (n = 33) randomly selected by institutions, density type (pure ground glass opacity, subsolid, and solid) and tumor size, two expert thoracic radiologists independently evaluated the tumor size for the resected lung cancer and the interobserver variability was evaluated.
resultsAmong 176 tumors, 162 (92%) were detected on MONCAD LCT. Tumor size measurement by original radiology report and CDSS were found to have excellent reliability with pathologic tumor size (ICC = 0.869 for absolute agreement). On reader study, excellent interobserver agreement (ICC = 0.907) was observed between two expert radiologists, which was inferior to the completely consistent CDSS results (ICC = 1.000).
conclusionsNo significant differences were found in the measurement of tumor size between radiologists and the CDSS. CDSS might be helpful to minimize interobserver variability for tumor size measurement by supplying consistent and reliable results. *CLINICAL RELEVANCE/APPLICATION: This real-world multicenter study demonstrates that the CDSS provides consistent and objective tumor size measurements, supporting its potential utility in standardizing preoperative lung cancer assessment.
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.