AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to validate the Cleveland Clinic malignancy probability prediction model for incidental pulmonary nodules using data from two medical centers.
  • Researchers collected data from 296 patients over nearly a year, comparing predictions of malignant nodules against actual outcomes at various time points.
  • Results showed that the Cleveland Clinic model performed consistently well in predicting malignancy, suggesting it can effectively aid in clinical decision-making for patients with high-risk pulmonary nodules.

Article Abstract

Objective: To perform a retrospective, multicenter, external validation of the Cleveland Clinic malignancy probability prediction model for incidental pulmonary nodules.

Patients And Methods: From July 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023, we identified 296 patients who underwent tissue acquisition at Mayo Clinic (MC) (n=198) and Loyola University Medical Center (n=98) with histopathology indicating malignant (n=195) or benign (n=101). Data was collected at initial radiographic identification (point 1) and at the time of intervention (point 2). Point 3 represented the most recent data. The areas under the receiver operating characteristics were calculated for each model per time point. Calibration was evaluated by comparing the predicted and observed rates of malignancy.

Results: The areas under the receiver operating characteristics at time points 1, 2, and 3 for the MC model were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.61-0.74), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.58-0.77), and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.63-0.76), respectively. The Cleveland Clinic model (CCM) was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.61-0.74), 0.75 (95% CI, 0.65-0.84), and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.66-0.78), respectively. The mean ± SD estimated probability for malignant pulmonary nodules (PNs) at time points 1, 2, and 3 for the CCM was 64.2±25.9, 65.8±24.0, and 64.7±24.4, which resembled the overall proportion of malignant PNs (66%). The mean estimated probability of malignancy for the MC model at each time point was 38.3±27.4, 36.2±24.4, and 42.1±27.3, substantially lower than the observed proportion of malignancies.

Conclusion: The CCM found discrimination similar to its internal validation and good calibration. The CCM can be used to augment clinical and shared decision-making when evaluating high-risk PNs.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11283066PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2024.05.005DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cleveland clinic
12
external validation
8
validation cleveland
8
clinic malignancy
8
malignancy probability
8
probability prediction
8
prediction model
8
pulmonary nodules
8
areas receiver
8
receiver operating
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!