BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Clin Oncol. Nov 24, 2025; 16(11): 110462
Published online Nov 24, 2025. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v16.i11.110462
Table 1 Summary of deep learning-based studies for lymph node disease diagnosis using 2-deoxy-2-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging
Ref.
No. of patients
Disease
Technical methods
Performance metrics
Chen et al[45] 201959Lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancerCombining a hybrid model of MaO-radiomics and 3D-CNNAccuracy = 0.88; Macro-average = 0.89; mean-OVA-AUC1 = 0.95; multi-class AUC2 = 0.95
Yang et al[6] 2023165Distinguish between lymph node metastases in swollen lymph nodes in the neck and lymphoma involvementDL-CNN, DL-SVM and a combined modelDL-CNN: Best model: ResNet50; AUC=0.845; Accuracy = 78.13%, DL-SVM: Best model: ResNet50; AUC = 0.901; accuracy = 86.96%, Combination model: AUC = 0.948; accuracy = 84.00%; sensitivity = 100.00%; specificity = 75.00%
Zhang et al[46] 2023689Lymph node metastasis of ESCCAI-CADDoctors vs AI-CAD: (1) Accuracy: 0.712→0.833; and (2) Specificity: 0.697→0.891. Diagnostic results in 12.1% of patients were corrected with AI-CAD assistance
Qiao et al[47] 2022228Lymph node metastases of NSCLCRadiomics nomogram based on 18F-FDG PET/CTTraining set: AUC = 0.884; test set: AUC = 0.881
Trägårdh et al[48] 2022660Local recurrence of prostate cancer, lymph node metastasis and bone metastasisUNet3D CNN modelDoctor sensitivity vs UNet3D CNN model sensitivity: (1) Local recurrence: 78% vs 79%; (2) Lymph node metastasis: 78% vs 79%; and (3) Bone metastasis: 59% vs 62%
Trägårdh et al[49] 2022221Pelvic lymph node metastasis of prostate cancerCNN modelDoctor average sensitivity vs CNN model sensitivity = 77% vs 82%