Evaluates AI video model's accuracy in predicting tumor grading in patients with PNENs, indicating a potential for enhanced diagnosis.
Background and Objectives: Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs) are rare tumors with heterogeneous outcomes. Tumor grading (G), based on mitotic count and Ki-67 index, is the main prognostic factor guiding treatment. EUS–guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy is the current standard but shows a misgrading rate up to 25%. We evaluated an artificial intelligence–based video analysis model to predict PNEN grading from contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS) recordings. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, a European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Center of Excellence. Patients were eligible if CE-EUS videos ≥1 minute (arterial and venous phases) and cyto-histological confirmation of PNEN were available. Exclusion criteria included mixed neuroendocrine–non-neuroendocrine neoplasms, missing Ki-67 grading, or poor video quality. CE-EUS videos were processed with a deep-learning video transformer model (GradAINet). The dataset was split into training (70%), validation (10%), and testing (20%) cohorts. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and F1-score. Results: Between 2022 and 2024, 115 patients were included (49 female, 42.6%): 70 had G1, and 45 had G2–G3 tumors. Overall, 253,751 video frames were analyzed. GradAINet achieved a sensitivity of 0.817 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.556–1.000), specificity 0.806 (95% CI: 0.588–1.000), positive predictive value 0.759 (95% CI: 0.500–1.000), negative predictive value 0.856 (95% CI: 0.667–1.000), and accuracy 0.811 (95% CI: 0.654–0.962). Conclusion: This artificial intelligence–driven CE-EUS video model shows high accuracy for PNEN grading and potentially complements EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy. As the first video-based rather than static-image model, it represents a methodological advance. Multicenter validation on larger cohorts is needed before clinical implementation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tacelli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: