Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025
Artificial intelligence in gastric cancer: a systematic review of machine learning and deep learning applications.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alsallal Muna, Habeeb Marwah Shaker, Vaghela Krunal, Malathi H, Vashisht Alisha, Sahu Prabhat Kumar, Singh Devendra, Al-Hussainy Ali Fawzi, Aljanaby Idris A, Sameer Hayder Naji, Athab Zainab H, Adil Mohaned, Yaseen Ahmed, Farhood Bagher
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer (GC) remains a major global health concern, ranking as the fifth most prevalent malignancy and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Although early detection can increase the 5-year survival rate of early gastric cancer (EGC) to over 90%, more than 80% of cases are diagnosed at advanced stages due to subtle clinical symptoms and diagnostic challenges. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), has shown great promise in addressing these limitations.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to evaluate the performance, applications, and limitations of ML and DL models in GC management, with a focus on their use in detection, diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis prediction across diverse clinical imaging and data modalities.
METHODS: Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies published between 2004 and May 2025. Eligible studies applied ML or DL algorithms for diagnostic or prognostic tasks in GC using data from endoscopy, computed tomography (CT), pathology, or multi-modal sources. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment.
RESULTS: A total of 59 studies met the inclusion criteria. DL models, particularly convolutional neural networks (CNNs), demonstrated strong performance in EGC detection, with reported sensitivities up to 95.3% and Area Under the Curve (AUCs) as high as 0.981, often exceeding expert endoscopists. CT-based radiomics and DL models achieved AUCs ranging from 0.825 to 0.972 for tumor staging and metastasis prediction. Pathology-based models reported accuracies up to 100% for EGC detection and AUCs up to 0.92 for predicting treatment response. Cross-modality approaches combining radiomics and pathomics achieved AUCs up to 0.951. Key challenges included algorithmic bias, limited dataset diversity, interpretability issues, and barriers to clinical integration.
CONCLUSION: ML and DL models have demonstrated substantial potential to improve early detection, diagnostic accuracy, and individualized treatment in GC. To advance clinical adoption, future research should prioritize the development of large, diverse datasets, implement explainable AI frameworks, and conduct prospective clinical trials. These efforts will be essential for integrating AI into precision oncology and addressing the increasing global burden of gastric cancer.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to evaluate the performance, applications, and limitations of ML and DL models in GC management, with a focus on their use in detection, diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis prediction across diverse clinical imaging and data modalities.
METHODS: Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies published between 2004 and May 2025. Eligible studies applied ML or DL algorithms for diagnostic or prognostic tasks in GC using data from endoscopy, computed tomography (CT), pathology, or multi-modal sources. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment.
RESULTS: A total of 59 studies met the inclusion criteria. DL models, particularly convolutional neural networks (CNNs), demonstrated strong performance in EGC detection, with reported sensitivities up to 95.3% and Area Under the Curve (AUCs) as high as 0.981, often exceeding expert endoscopists. CT-based radiomics and DL models achieved AUCs ranging from 0.825 to 0.972 for tumor staging and metastasis prediction. Pathology-based models reported accuracies up to 100% for EGC detection and AUCs up to 0.92 for predicting treatment response. Cross-modality approaches combining radiomics and pathomics achieved AUCs up to 0.951. Key challenges included algorithmic bias, limited dataset diversity, interpretability issues, and barriers to clinical integration.
CONCLUSION: ML and DL models have demonstrated substantial potential to improve early detection, diagnostic accuracy, and individualized treatment in GC. To advance clinical adoption, future research should prioritize the development of large, diverse datasets, implement explainable AI frameworks, and conduct prospective clinical trials. These efforts will be essential for integrating AI into precision oncology and addressing the increasing global burden of gastric cancer.