Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Sep 22.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-025-12000-6. Online ahead of print.

Machine learning predicts severe adverse events and salvage success of CT-guided lung biopsy after nondiagnostic transbronchial lung biopsy

Affiliations

Machine learning predicts severe adverse events and salvage success of CT-guided lung biopsy after nondiagnostic transbronchial lung biopsy

Song Yang et al. Eur Radiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To address the unmet clinical need for validated risk stratification tools in salvage CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy (PNLB) following nondiagnostic transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB). We aimed to develop machine learning models predicting severe adverse events (SAEs) in PNLB (Model 1) and diagnostic success of salvage PNLB post-TBLB failure (Model 2).

Materials and methods: This multicenter predictive modeling study enrolled 2910 cases undergoing PNLB across two centers (Center 1: n = 2653 (2016-2020); Center 2: n = 257 (2017-2022)) with complete imaging and clinical documentation meeting predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Key variables were selected via LASSO regression, followed by development and validation of Model 1 (incorporating sex, smoking, pleural contact, lesion size, and puncture depth) and Model 2 (including age, lesion size, lesion characteristics, and post-bronchoscopic pathological categories (PBPCs)) using ten machine learning algorithms. Model performance was rigorously evaluated through discrimination metrics, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis to assess clinical applicability.

Results: A total of 2653 and 257 PNLB cases were included from two centers, where Model 1 achieved external validation ROC-AUC 0.717 (95% CI: 0.609-0.825) and PR-AUC 0.258 (95% CI: 0.0365-0.708), while Model 2 exhibited ROC-AUC 0.884 (95% CI: 0.784-0.984) and PR-AUC 0.852 (95% CI: 0.784-0.896), with XGBoost outperforming other algorithms.

Conclusion: The dual XGBoost system stratifies salvage PNLB candidates by quantifying SAE risks (AUC = 0.717) versus diagnostic yield (AUC = 0.884), addressing the unmet need for personalized biopsy pathway optimization.

Key points: Question Current tools cannot quantify severe adverse event (SAE) risks versus salvage diagnostic success for CT-guided lung biopsy (PNLB) after failed transbronchial biopsy (TBLB). Findings Dual XGBoost models successfully predicted the risks of PNLB SAEs (AUC = 0.717) and diagnostic success post-TBLB failure (AUC = 0.884) with validated clinical stratification benefits. Clinical relevance The dual XGBoost system guides clinical decision-making by integrating individual risk of SAEs with predictors of diagnostic success, enabling personalized salvage biopsy strategies that balance safety and diagnostic yield.

Keywords: Biopsy (Needle); Bronchoscopy; Machine learning; Risk assessment; Sensitivity and specificity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Compliance with ethical standards. Guarantor: The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Song Yang. Conflict of interest: The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. Statistics and biometry: No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Informed consent: Written consent was not required for this study because it used anonymised retrospective data. Ethical approval: The retrospective study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University (No. KY2022-R115) and the Institutional Review Board of Quzhou Municipal People’s Hospital (No. 2024-114) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All patient information was anonymized, and therefore informed consent was waived. Study subjects or cohorts overlap: None. Methodology: Retrospective Diagnostic or prognostic study Multicenter study

References

    1. Mazzone PJ, Silvestri GA, Souter LH et al (2021) Screening for lung cancer: CHEST guideline and expert panel report. Chest 160:e427–e494 - PubMed - PMC - DOI
    1. Oudkerk M, Devaraj A, Vliegenthart R et al (2017) European position statement on lung cancer screening. Lancet Oncol 18:e754–e766 - PubMed - DOI
    1. Shin KE, Park JS, Lee JW (2021) Diagnostic accuracy of CT-guided core needle biopsy for thin-walled cavitary pulmonary lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 216:369–375 - PubMed - DOI
    1. Du Y, Li Y, Dorrius MD et al (2021) Comparison of National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European Position Statement protocols for nodule management in low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening in a general Chinese population. J Thorac Dis 13:6855–6865 - PubMed - PMC - DOI
    1. Kim DY, Sun JS, Kim EY, Park KJ, You S (2022) Diagnostic accuracy and safety of CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy with a coaxial cutting needle for the diagnosis of lung cancer in patients with UIP pattern. Sci Rep 12:15682 - PubMed - PMC - DOI

LinkOut - more resources