Paraphernalia
AarXiv2023

Artificial intelligence for diagnosing and predicting survival of patients with renal cell carcinoma: Retrospective multi-center study

Siteng Chen, Xiyue Wang, Jun Zhang, Liren Jiang, Ning Zhang, Feng Gao, Wei Yang, Jinxi Xiang, Sen Yang, Junhua Zheng, Xiao Han

Abstract

'Feng Gao' 'Wei Yang' 'Jinxi Xiang' 'Sen Yang' 'Junhua Zheng' 'Xiao Han'] Results: Automatic diagnosis for ccRCC through intelligent subtyping of renal cell carcinoma was proved in this study. Our graderisk achieved aera the curve (AUC) of 0.840 (95% confidence interval: 0.805-0.871) in the TCGA cohort, 0.840 (0.805-0.871) in the General cohort, and 0.840 (0.805- 0.871) in the CPTAC cohort for the recognition of high-grade tumor. The OSrisk for the prediction of 5-year survival status achieved AUC of 0.784 (0.746-0.819) in the TCGA cohort, which was further verified in the independent General cohort and the CPTAC cohort, with AUC of 0.774 (0.723-0.820) and 0.702 (0.632-0.765), respectively. Cox regression analysisindicated that graderisk, OSrisk, tumor grade, and tumor stage were found to be independent prognostic factors, which were further incorporated into the competing-risk nomogram (CRN). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses further illustrated that our CRN could significantly distinguish patients with high survival risk, with hazard ratio of 5.664 (3.893-8.239, p < 0.0001) in the TCGA cohort, 35.740 (5.889-216.900, p < 0.0001) in the General cohort and 6.107 (1.815 to 20.540, p < 0.0001) in the CPTAC cohort. Comparison analyses conformed that our CRN outperformed current prognosis indicators in the prediction of survival status, with higher concordance index for clinical prognosis.

§ The Valyu brief

Reading the full paper and taking notes. This takes a few seconds…

§ Ask this paper

Ask a question about this paper

Valyu reads the full text and answers from what the paper actually says.

Q.

Searching the other archives…

Artificial intelligence for diagnosing and predicting survival of patients with renal cell carcinoma: Retrospective multi-center study · Paraphernalia