MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Early Prediction of Pancreatic Cancer Using Deep Learning: A Data-Driven Approach for Timely Diagnosis

2025· article· W7131132161 on OpenAlexaff
Kunal Hiwase, Rajendra M. Rewatkar, Meher Langote, Pradnyawant M. Gote, Prajyot Yesankar, Pradnya Zode

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPancreatic cancerGeneralizability theoryAsymptomaticCancerDeep learningClinical Practice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal types of cancer in the world, due mainly to its asymptomatic nature until the late stages. It has been estimated that globally, 60% of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer are found to be in an advanced stage, with less than 5% five-year survival rates. In contrast, only 11% of the patients are identified at localized stages where treatment options tend to be more favorable. The large disparity in early-stage pancreatic cancer detection versus late-stage pancreatic cancer strongly underlines the urgent need for viable early detection methods. Deep learning has emerged as a pioneering diagnostic tool because of its outstanding aptitude to analyze complex biomedical data with high dimensionality. This review analyzes recent progress in deep learning applications primarily focused on early prediction using various data sources: radiological imagery (CT, MRI, endoscopic ultrasound), genomic information and biomarkers (RNA-seq, DNA methylation), and electronic health records. Review of the evolved CNN architectures, variations of U-Net, and transformer-based models presents strong accuracy metrics, sensitivity, and AUC scores. This review shows that the performance of multimodal approaches, which integrate imaging with biomarkers, far exceeds models based on a single modality. Yet, these approaches still raise challenges related to the availability of data, model interpretability, and generalizability across populations. Discussion centers around the clinical significance of DL-enhanced early detection methods for better patient outcomes and reductions in the global burden of disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→