ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Enabling earlier detection of spinal lesions in CT imaging with artificial intelligence-a case study.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates whether an artificial intelligence-based second reader can detect malignant spinal lesions on computed tomography earlier than radiologists, thereby supporting precision oncology through more timely diagnosis and treatment planning. The spine is one of the most common locations for metastases in advanced cancer, significantly influencing symptoms, staging and therapeutic decisions. Delayed or missed detection can, however, impair outcomes. A three-dimensional nnU-Net segmentation model trained on 653 scans was applied to a retrospective cohort of 200 patients who later received confirmed diagnoses of malignant spinal lesions; earlier examinations without documented disease were re-evaluated by one board-certified radiologist both unaided and with AI support. The primary measure was the proportion of malignant spinal lesions detected by the model before their baseline reporting, with AI-derived lead time as a secondary endpoint. The system identified 12 malignant spinal lesions that remained invisible to radiologists on unaided retrospective review, achieving a mean lead time of 228 days, and highlighted 25 additional malignant spinal lesions that were retrospectively visible but initially unreported. Across the cohort, AI flagged earlier findings in 37 patients. These preliminary results suggest that AI-assisted CT interpretation may have the potential to identify sub-visual or otherwise overlooked malignant spinal lesions at an earlier scan date than standard radiologist reporting. Further prospective studies are needed to determine whether these findings translate into clinical benefits such as improved diagnostic completeness, earlier treatment initiation, and better patient outcomes.
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.