ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2026
Empirical evaluation of variability and multi-institutional generalizability of deep learning survival models: application to renal cancer CT scans.
Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Application of deep learning in prognostic prediction of non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning survival (DLS) modeling has shown significant promise across multiple disease conditions for predicting patient outcomes via biomedical data, but remain relatively under-explored in conjunction with medical imaging. This poses the question of what methodological choices promote model generalization, especially when predicting continuous survival outcomes in external validation cohorts. In this work, we systematically examined the impact of data partitioning, data order, model initialization, and augmentation strategies on the generalization of CT-based DLS survival models in renal cancers. A multi-institutional CT cohort was assembled, leveraging public repositories such as TCGA-KIRC, TCGA-KICH, TCGA-KIRP, and KITS19; totaling 525 patients from across 9 institutions. A 3D ResNet-18 model was trained to predict overall patient survival with a Cox loss function and evaluated across three controlled experiments: (i) random versus covariate-balanced data partitioning, (ii) randomizing vs fixing data ordering and initial model weights, and (iii) varying intensity, spatial, and noise based augmentations; evaluated in terms of concordance index (c-index) and hazard ratio (HR). Intelligent covariate-balanced data partitioning demonstrated optimal performance on an external validation set (c-index 0.74, HR 5.08) compared to random partitioning (c-index 0.56, HR 0.29). Different model initializations significantly impacted the average performance and variance across replicate trainings, while data ordering had little to no effect. Combining multiple augmentations produced the best performance on external validation (c-index +4.76%, HR +44.39%) compared to no augmentations, while most impactful individual augmentation type was additive gaussian noise (c-index +3.17%, HR +23.47%). Our results demonstrate that careful selection of strategies for data partitioning and ordering, weight initialization, and image augmentation are critical for developing robust and generalizable DL models for continuous survival prediction using medical imaging data.
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.