Radiomics and deep learning models to differentiate lung adenosquamous carcinoma: A multicenter trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) is frequently misdiagnosed or overlooked in clinical practice due to its dual histological components and potential transformation from either adenocarcinoma (ADC) or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Our study aimed to differentiate ASC from ADC and SCC by incorporating features of enhanced CTs and clinical characteristics to build radiomics and deep learning models. The classification models were trained in Xiangya Hospital and validated in two other independent hospitals. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were used to estimate the performance. The optimal three-class classification model achieved a maximum AUC of 0.89 and accuracy of 0.81 in external validation sets, AUC of 0.99 and accuracy of 0.99 in the internal test set. These findings highlight the efficacy of our models in differentiating ASC, providing a non-invasive, timely, and accurate diagnostic approach before and during the treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".