A Prospective Cohort Study Comparing Artificial Intelligence Multimodal Fusion Prediction Models With Conventional Imaging Assessment for the Diagnosis of Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Cervical Cancer
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
- Sponsor
- Obstetrics & Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University
- Enrollment
- 230
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Accuracy in determining pelvic lymph node metastasis
- Status
- Not yet recruiting
- Last Updated
- last year
Overview
Brief Summary
The goal of this prospective cohort study is to learn whether artificial intelligence multimodal fusion prediction models are effective in diagnosing pelvic lymph node metastasis in cervical cancer. The main question it aims to answer is: can artificial intelligence multimodal fusion prediction models improve the accuracy of preoperative diagnosis of pelvic lymph node metastasis in cervical cancer? The researchers compared the AI multimodal fusion prediction model with traditional imaging physician assessments to see if the prediction model could yield more accurate lymph node metastasis determinations. Participants will undergo pelvic MRI after pathologically confirming a diagnosis of cervical cancer, and the results will be used to determine pelvic lymph node metastasis status by the predictive model and the imaging physician, respectively. Subsequent pathology results after surgical lymph node clearance will be used as the gold standard to determine the accuracy of the two preoperative lymph node diagnostic modalities.
Investigators
Xin Wu
Deputy Chief of Gynecologic Oncology
Obstetrics & Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Accuracy in determining pelvic lymph node metastasis
Time Frame: The time frame was from subject enrollment until surgical pathology results were obtained. The time between subject enrollment and the availability of surgical pathology results was approximately 1 to 1.5 months.
After the subjects underwent surgical treatment, surgical pathology served as the gold standard for evaluating the accuracy of the AI predictive model in comparison to traditional imaging diagnosis. In the statistical analysis phase, sensitivity and specificity were utilized as the primary indicators to assess the accuracy of both diagnostic modalities.