MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109878651 · doi:10.21037/atm-20-1419

Predicting aggressive histopathological features in esophageal cancer with positron emission tomography using a deep convolutional neural network

2021· article· en· W3109878651 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wei-Hsiang Yu, Chengkun Yang, Ling‐I Chien, Ko-Han Lin, Wen‐Sheng Huang, Po‐Kuei Hsu

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Translational Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEsophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsLymphovascular invasionEsophageal cancerPositron emission tomographyMedicineEsophagectomyConvolutional neural networkReceiver operating characteristicStage (stratigraphy)Lung cancerPerineural invasionEsophageal squamous cell carcinomaNuclear medicineDiscriminative modelArtificial intelligenceCancerRadiologyPathologyComputer scienceInternal medicineMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and perineural invasion (PNI) are of great prognostic importance in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Currently, positron emission tomography (PET) scans are the only means of functional assessment prior to treatment. We aimed to predict the presence of LVI and PNI in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma using PET imaging data by training a three-dimensional convolution neural network (3D-CNN). METHODS: Seven hundred and ninety-eight PET scans of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and 309 PET scans of patients with stage I lung cancer were collected. In the first part of this study, we built a 3D-CNN based on a residual network, ResNet, for a task to classify the scans into esophageal cancer or lung cancer. In the second stage, we collected the PET scans of 278 patients undergoing esophagectomy for a task to classify and predict the presence of LVI/PNI. RESULTS: In the first part, the model performance attained an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.860. In the second part, we randomly split 80%, 10%, and 10% of our dataset into training set, validation set and testing set, respectively, for a task to classify the scans into the presence of LVI/PNI and evaluated the model performance on the testing set. Our 3D-CNN model attained an AUC of 0.668 in the testing set, which shows a better discriminative ability than random guessing. CONCLUSIONS: A 3D-CNN can be trained, using PET imaging datasets, to predict LNV/PNI in esophageal cancer with acceptable accuracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Translational MedicineSame topicEsophageal Cancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207