MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391264773 · doi:10.1016/j.ceh.2024.01.002

Expert consensus on the evaluation and management of high-risk indeterminate pulmonary nodules

2024· article· en· W4391264773 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dawei Yang, Stephan Lam, Kai Wang, Qi Wang, Li Bai, Yuehong Wang, Ming Li, Li Yang, Feng‐Ming Kong, Haiquan Chen, Ming Fan, Jianwei Xuan, Fred R. Hirsch, Charles A. Powell, Bai Chunxue

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical eHealth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndeterminateRisk managementMedicineManagementEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most effective method for improving the prognosis of lung cancer is the application of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for pulmonary nodule screening in populations at high risk. Timely diagnosis and treatment of early-stage lung cancer can contribute to higher long-term survival rates. However, it remains difficult to differentiate malignant from benign pulmonary nodules measuring 8–15 mm, and avoid overtreatment on the one hand and delayed diagnosis on the other handIn this consensus paper, we aimed to clarify the definition of “high-risk indeterminate pulmonary nodules (IPNs)” and discuss appropriate evaluation and management to facilitate timely diagnosis of lung cancer to improve lung cancer outcome. Direction for future research was discussed. A multi-disciplinary panel of doctors and IT experts from Asia, Canada and the U.S.were invited to participate. Published evidence and consensus guidelines were used to develop this consensus. was clarified. Their evaluation and management were discussed. The experts believed that the prevalence of pulmonary nodules was very high, and it that was difficult to diagnose early-stage lung cancer due to the small size of the nodules, often leading to delayed diagnosis or overtreatment. To address this issue and to improve long-term outcome, the panel considered important to revise the classification of high-risk IPNs, (1) as pulmonary nodules that cannot be clearly diagnosed with non-surgical biopsy procedures, but is highly suspicious for early-stage lung cancer. The panel also recommends the most responsible should arrange imaging evaluations and follow-ups, taking new technologies into account. Artificial intelligence (AI) assessment based on the Medical Internet of Things (MIoT) can be combined with expert opinion to form a human–computer multidisciplinary team (MDT) that can fully implement the three core procedures of the MIoT, namely, comprehensive perception, reliable transmission, and intelligent processing. This will help to upgrade the non-standard diagnosis and treatment, the so-called “handicraft workshop model”, to a modern assembly-line model that meets international standards. The MIoT technology, which has the potential to realize “simplification of complex problems, digitalization of simple problems, programming of digital problems, and systematization of programming problems”, can promote the homogeneous evaluation of pulmonary nodules by enhancing both the sensitivity and the specificity of detecting early-stage lung cancer, in order to avoid delayed diagnosis and overtreatment. To optimize the evaluation of early-stage lung cancer, and to avoid delayed diagnosis and overtreatment, it is necessary to propose and promote the concept of “high-risk IPNs”. The application of current technologies, AI, and a human–computer MDT, will facilitate improvement in nodule evaluation, transforming the current diagnosis and treatment model, which is akin to production in handicraft workshops, into a modern assembly-line model that meets international standards, and will ultimately result in better prognosis.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical eHealthSame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207