Automated imaging-based stratification of early-stage lung cancer patients prior to receiving surgical resection using deep learning applied to CTs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1552 Background: Computed tomography (CT) imaging is an important tool to guide further investigation and treatment in patients with lung cancer. For patients with early stage lung cancer, surgery remains an optimal treatment option. Artificial intelligence applied to pretreatment CTs may have the ability to quantify mortality risk and stratify patients for more individualized diagnostic, treatment and monitoring decisions. Methods: A fully automated, end-to-end model was designed to localize the 36cm x 36cm x 36cm space centered on the lungs and learn deep prognostic features using a 3-dimensional convolutional neural network (3DCNN) to predict 5-year mortality risk. The 3DCNN was trained and validated in a 5-fold cross-validation using 2,924 CTs of 1,689 lung cancer patients from 6 public datasets made available in The Cancer Imaging Archive. We evaluated 3DCNN’s ability to stratify stage I & II patients who received surgery into mortality risk quintiles using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: 260 of the 1,689 lung cancer patients in the withheld validation dataset were diagnosed as stage I or II, received a surgical resection within 6 months of their pretreatment CT and had known 5-year disease and survival outcomes. Based on the 3DCNN’s predicted mortality risk, patients in the highest risk quintile had a 14.2-fold (95% CI 4.3-46.8, p < 0.001) increase in 5-year mortality hazard compared to patients in the lowest risk quintile. Conclusions: Deep learning applied to pretreatment CTs provides personalised prognostic insights for early stage lung cancer patients who received surgery and has the potential to inform treatment and monitoring decisions.[Table: see text]
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".