Multicenter study shows that ResNet-10 outperforms other models in classifying lung adenocarcinoma types, suggesting improved management strategies.
Introduction Preoperative differentiation among adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA), and invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC) is crucial for guiding ground-glass nodule (GGN) management. This multicenter study evaluated the comparative utility of deep learning (DL), radiomics, and conventional machine learning (cML)-based clinicoradiographic models for this ternary classification. Methods We developed four DL models (DenseNet-121, ResNet-10, ResNet-18, and VGG-13) for the ternary classification of AIS, MIA, and IAC using multicenter CT datasets. For comparative analysis, we constructed two additional classification models: (1) a radiomics model employing feature engineering through analysis of variance, recursive feature elimination with cross-validation, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, and (2) the cML-based clinicoradiographic model utilizing 12 different classifiers. The performance of all models was evaluated using the macro area under the curve (Macro-AUC) metric. Results 847 GGNs postoperatively confirmed as lung adenocarcinoma were included in this multicenter study, which were randomly split into a training set (70%, n=592) and a validation set (30%, n=255). The DL model ResNet-10 demonstrated superior performance, achieving a Macro-AUC of 0.8055 (95% CI: 0.7723-0.8387), an accuracy of 0.6300 (95% CI: 0.5541-0.6764), and an F1-score of 0.4206 (95% CI: 0.3821-0.4598). This performance surpassed that of the radiomics model, which had a Macro-AUC of 0.7801 (95% CI: 0.7432-0.8170), an accuracy of 0.6100 (95% CI: 0.5276-0.6204), and an F1-score of 0.5505 (95% CI: 0.4983-0.6017), and the cML-based clinicoradiographic model, which achieved a Macro-AUC of 0.7770 (95% CI: 0.708-0.846), an accuracy of 0.6000 (95% CI: 0.5376-0.6604), and an F1-score of 0.4438 (95% CI: 0.3925-0.4961). Conclusion The ResNet-10 network established a novel ternary classification model for predicting the invasiveness of GGNs. This approach provides clinically actionable insights that support surgical planning and facilitate risk-adapted management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Long et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: