Multi-Institutional Validation of Deep Learning for Pretreatment Identification of Extranodal Extension in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Extranodal extension (ENE) is a well-established poor prognosticator and an indication for adjuvant treatment escalation in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Identification of ENE on pretreatment imaging represents a diagnostic challenge that limits its clinical utility. We previously developed a deep learning algorithm that identifies ENE on pretreatment computed tomography (CT) imaging in patients with HNSCC. We sought to validate our algorithm performance for patients from a diverse set of institutions and compare its diagnostic ability to that of expert diagnosticians. METHODS We obtained preoperative, contrast-enhanced CT scans and corresponding pathology results from two external data sets of patients with HNSCC: an external institution and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) HNSCC imaging data. Lymph nodes were segmented and annotated as ENE-positive or ENE-negative on the basis of pathologic confirmation. Deep learning algorithm performance was evaluated and compared directly to two board-certified neuroradiologists. RESULTS A total of 200 lymph nodes were examined in the external validation data sets. For lymph nodes from the external institution, the algorithm achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.84 (83.1% accuracy), outperforming radiologists’ AUCs of 0.70 and 0.71 ( P = .02 and P = .01). Similarly, for lymph nodes from the TCGA, the algorithm achieved an AUC of 0.90 (88.6% accuracy), outperforming radiologist AUCs of 0.60 and 0.82 ( P < .0001 and P = .16). Radiologist diagnostic accuracy improved when receiving deep learning assistance. CONCLUSION Deep learning successfully identified ENE on pretreatment imaging across multiple institutions, exceeding the diagnostic ability of radiologists with specialized head and neck experience. Our findings suggest that deep learning has utility in the identification of ENE in patients with HNSCC and has the potential to be integrated into clinical decision making.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".