An artificial intelligence prediction model outperforms conventional guidelines in predicting lymph node metastasis of T1 colorectal cancer

According to guidelines, a lot of patients with T1 colorectal cancers (CRCs) undergo additional surgery with lymph node dissection after being treated by endoscopic resection (ER) despite the low incidence of lymph node metastasis (LNM). The aim of this study was to develop an artificial intelligenc...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in oncology 2023-10, Vol.13, p.1229998-1229998
Hauptverfasser: Piao, Zheng Hua, Ge, Rong, Lu, Lu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:According to guidelines, a lot of patients with T1 colorectal cancers (CRCs) undergo additional surgery with lymph node dissection after being treated by endoscopic resection (ER) despite the low incidence of lymph node metastasis (LNM). The aim of this study was to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model to more effectively identify T1 CRCs at risk for LNM and reduce the rate of unnecessary additional surgery. We retrospectively analyzed 651 patients with T1 CRCs. The patient cohort was randomly divided into a training set (546 patients) and a test set (105 patients) (ratio 5:1), and a classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm was trained on the training set to develop a predictive AI model for LNM. The model used 12 clinicopathological factors to predict positivity or negativity for LNM. To compare the performance of the AI model with the conventional guidelines, the test set was evaluated according to the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. Finally, we tested the performance of the AI model using the test set and compared it with the JSCCR and NCCN guidelines. The AI model had better predictive performance (AUC=0.960) than the JSCCR (AUC=0.588) and NCCN guidelines (AUC=0.850). The specificity (85.8% vs. 17.5%,
ISSN:2234-943X
2234-943X
DOI:10.3389/fonc.2023.1229998