神经内分泌肿瘤诊断检查中神经内分泌标志物的选择:真实世界数据和机器学习模型算法

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Haiming Tang MD, PhD, Haoran Xia PhD, Nanfei Sun PhD, Patricia V. Hernandez MD, Minhua Wang MD, PhD, Adebowale J. Adeniran MD, Guoping Cai MD
{"title":"神经内分泌肿瘤诊断检查中神经内分泌标志物的选择:真实世界数据和机器学习模型算法","authors":"Haiming Tang MD, PhD,&nbsp;Haoran Xia PhD,&nbsp;Nanfei Sun PhD,&nbsp;Patricia V. Hernandez MD,&nbsp;Minhua Wang MD, PhD,&nbsp;Adebowale J. Adeniran MD,&nbsp;Guoping Cai MD","doi":"10.1002/cncy.70018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Accurate diagnosis of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) is challenging, especially in poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). This study was aimed to search the best or best combination of neuroendocrine markers in the diagnostic workup of NENs via analysis of the real-world data and machine learning algorithms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Cytology cases with a workup of four neuroendocrine markers (chromogranin, synaptophysin, CD56, and INSM1) were retrieved. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) were calculated for each marker alone or in combination. Two machine learning algorithms, neural network and random forests, were also tested.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The study cohort included 106 NENs (64 NECs and 42 well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors [NETs]) and 36 non-NEN cases. The combination of synaptophysin and INSM1 had sensitivity of 0.95, specificity of 0.92, and AUC-ROC of 0.93. Addition of CD56 to the combination further increased the sensitivity and AUC-ROC to 1 and 0.96, respectively, in all NENs as well as NEC cases. In addition, the combination of chromogranin, synaptophysin and INSM1 had sensitivity of 1, specificity of 0.92, and AUC-ROC of 0.96 in NETs. Machine learning models, specifically random forests and neural network, confirmed the efficacy of combining synaptophysin, INSM1, and CD56.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The combination of synaptophysin, INSM1, and CD56 has the best performance in diagnostic workup of all NENs, although chromogranin may be selected for NETS. The random forests and neural network models support the common practice rule of requiring at least two out of three markers to be positive for optimal marker utilization.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":9410,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Cytopathology","volume":"133 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Selection of neuroendocrine markers in diagnostic workup of neuroendocrine neoplasms: The real-world data and machine learning model algorithms\",\"authors\":\"Haiming Tang MD, PhD,&nbsp;Haoran Xia PhD,&nbsp;Nanfei Sun PhD,&nbsp;Patricia V. Hernandez MD,&nbsp;Minhua Wang MD, PhD,&nbsp;Adebowale J. Adeniran MD,&nbsp;Guoping Cai MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cncy.70018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Accurate diagnosis of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) is challenging, especially in poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). This study was aimed to search the best or best combination of neuroendocrine markers in the diagnostic workup of NENs via analysis of the real-world data and machine learning algorithms.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Cytology cases with a workup of four neuroendocrine markers (chromogranin, synaptophysin, CD56, and INSM1) were retrieved. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) were calculated for each marker alone or in combination. Two machine learning algorithms, neural network and random forests, were also tested.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study cohort included 106 NENs (64 NECs and 42 well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors [NETs]) and 36 non-NEN cases. The combination of synaptophysin and INSM1 had sensitivity of 0.95, specificity of 0.92, and AUC-ROC of 0.93. Addition of CD56 to the combination further increased the sensitivity and AUC-ROC to 1 and 0.96, respectively, in all NENs as well as NEC cases. In addition, the combination of chromogranin, synaptophysin and INSM1 had sensitivity of 1, specificity of 0.92, and AUC-ROC of 0.96 in NETs. Machine learning models, specifically random forests and neural network, confirmed the efficacy of combining synaptophysin, INSM1, and CD56.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The combination of synaptophysin, INSM1, and CD56 has the best performance in diagnostic workup of all NENs, although chromogranin may be selected for NETS. The random forests and neural network models support the common practice rule of requiring at least two out of three markers to be positive for optimal marker utilization.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Cytopathology\",\"volume\":\"133 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Cytopathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncy.70018\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Cytopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncy.70018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景神经内分泌肿瘤(NENs)的准确诊断具有挑战性,特别是低分化神经内分泌癌(NECs)。本研究旨在通过分析真实世界的数据和机器学习算法,寻找NENs诊断检查中神经内分泌标志物的最佳或最佳组合。方法收集4种神经内分泌标志物(嗜铬粒蛋白、突触素、CD56、INSM1)的细胞学检查病例。计算各指标单独或联合使用的敏感性、特异性和受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC-ROC)。还测试了两种机器学习算法,神经网络和随机森林。结果本组共纳入nen病例106例(NECs 64例,高分化神经内分泌肿瘤[NETs] 42例)和非nen病例36例。synaptophysin与INSM1联合使用的敏感性为0.95,特异性为0.92,AUC-ROC为0.93。在所有NENs和NEC病例中,CD56的加入进一步将敏感性和AUC-ROC分别提高到1和0.96。此外,嗜铬粒蛋白、synaptophysin和INSM1联合使用NETs的敏感性为1,特异性为0.92,AUC-ROC为0.96。机器学习模型,特别是随机森林和神经网络,证实了synaptophysin、INSM1和CD56联合使用的有效性。结论联合应用synaptophysin、INSM1和CD56对NENs的诊断效果最好,而嗜铬粒蛋白对NETS的诊断效果最好。随机森林和神经网络模型支持通常的实践规则,即要求至少三个标记中的两个是正的,以获得最佳的标记利用率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Selection of neuroendocrine markers in diagnostic workup of neuroendocrine neoplasms: The real-world data and machine learning model algorithms

Background

Accurate diagnosis of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) is challenging, especially in poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). This study was aimed to search the best or best combination of neuroendocrine markers in the diagnostic workup of NENs via analysis of the real-world data and machine learning algorithms.

Methods

Cytology cases with a workup of four neuroendocrine markers (chromogranin, synaptophysin, CD56, and INSM1) were retrieved. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) were calculated for each marker alone or in combination. Two machine learning algorithms, neural network and random forests, were also tested.

Results

The study cohort included 106 NENs (64 NECs and 42 well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors [NETs]) and 36 non-NEN cases. The combination of synaptophysin and INSM1 had sensitivity of 0.95, specificity of 0.92, and AUC-ROC of 0.93. Addition of CD56 to the combination further increased the sensitivity and AUC-ROC to 1 and 0.96, respectively, in all NENs as well as NEC cases. In addition, the combination of chromogranin, synaptophysin and INSM1 had sensitivity of 1, specificity of 0.92, and AUC-ROC of 0.96 in NETs. Machine learning models, specifically random forests and neural network, confirmed the efficacy of combining synaptophysin, INSM1, and CD56.

Conclusions

The combination of synaptophysin, INSM1, and CD56 has the best performance in diagnostic workup of all NENs, although chromogranin may be selected for NETS. The random forests and neural network models support the common practice rule of requiring at least two out of three markers to be positive for optimal marker utilization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Cytopathology
Cancer Cytopathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
17.60%
发文量
130
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Cytopathology provides a unique forum for interaction and dissemination of original research and educational information relevant to the practice of cytopathology and its related oncologic disciplines. The journal strives to have a positive effect on cancer prevention, early detection, diagnosis, and cure by the publication of high-quality content. The mission of Cancer Cytopathology is to present and inform readers of new applications, technological advances, cutting-edge research, novel applications of molecular techniques, and relevant review articles related to cytopathology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信