Dataset Information

Radiomics quality score in renal masses: a systematic assessment on current literature.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To perform a systematic assessment and analyze the quality of radiomics methodology in current literature in the evaluation of renal masses using the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) approach.

Methods

We systematically reviewed recent radiomics literature in renal masses published in PubMed, EMBASE, Elsevier, and Web of Science. Two reviewers blinded by each other's scores evaluated the quality of radiomics methodology in studies published from 2015 to August 2021 using the RQS approach. Owing to the diversity in the imaging modalities and radiomics applications, a meta-analysis could not be performed.

Results

Based on our inclusion/exclusion criteria, a total of 87 published studies were included in our study. The highest RQS was noted in three categories: reporting of clinical utility, gold standard, and feature reduction. The average RQS of the two reviewers ranged from 5 ≤ RQS≤19, with the maximum attainable RQS being 36. Very few (7/87 i.e., 8%) studies received an average RQS that ranged from 17 < RQS≤19, which represents studies with the highest RQS in our study. Many (39/87 i.e., 45%) studies received an average RQS that ranged from 13 < RQS≤15. No significant interreviewer scoring differences were observed.

Conclusions

We report that the overall scientific quality and reporting of radiomics studies in renal masses is suboptimal, and subsequent studies should bolster current deficiencies to improve reporting of radiomics methodologies.

Advances in knowledge

The RQS approach is a meaningful quantitative scoring system to assess radiomics methodology quality and supports a comprehensive evaluation of the radiomics approach before its incorporation into clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Azadikhah A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10996962 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Radiomics quality score in renal masses: a systematic assessment on current literature.

Azadikhah Afshin A Varghese Bino Abel BA Lei Xiaomeng X Martin-King Chloe C Cen Steven Yong SY Duddalwar Vinay Anant VA

The British journal of radiology 20220615 1137

<h4>Objective</h4>To perform a systematic assessment and analyze the quality of radiomics methodology in current literature in the evaluation of renal masses using the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) approach.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed recent radiomics literature in renal masses published in PubMed, EMBASE, Elsevier, and Web of Science. Two reviewers blinded by each other's scores evaluated the quality of radiomics methodology in studies published from 2015 to August 2021 using the ...[more]

PMID: 35671097

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRadiomics extracts specific quantitative data from medical images and explores the characteristics of tumors by analyzing these representations and making predictions. The purpose of this paper is to review computed tomography (CT)-based radiomics articles related to prognostic outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), assess their scientificity and quality by the latest radiomics quality score (RQS) 2.0 scoring criteria, and provide references for subsequent related studies.MethodsCT-based radiomics studies on NSCLC prognosis published from 1 November 2012 to 30 November 2022 in English were screened through the databases of the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed. By excluding criteria such as non-original studies, small sample sizes studies, positron emission tomography (PET)/CT only, and methodological studies only, 17 studies in English were included. The RQS proposed in 2017 is a quality evaluation index specific to radiomics following the PRISMA guidelines, and the latest update of RQS 2.0 has improved the scientificity and completeness of the score. Each checkpoint either belongs to handcrafted radiomics (HCR), deep learning, or both.ResultsThe 17 included studies covered most treatments for NSCLC, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery, radiofrequency ablation, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy, and predicted outcomes such as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastases, and disease-free survival (DFS). The median score rate for the included studies was 28%, with a range of 12% to 44%. The quality of studies in HCR is not high, and only 4 studies have been validated with independent cohorts.ConclusionsThe value of radiomics studies needs to be increased, such that clinical application will be possible, and the field of radiomics still has much room for growth. To make prediction models more reliable and stable in forecasting the prognosis of NSCLC and advancing the individualized treatment of NSCLC patients, more clinicians must participate in their development and clinical testing.

Project description:ObjectiveThe main aim of the present systematic review was a comprehensive overview of the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS)-based systematic reviews to highlight common issues and challenges of radiomics research application and evaluate the relationship between RQS and review features.MethodsThe literature search was performed on multiple medical literature archives according to PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews that reported radiomic quality assessment through the RQS. Reported scores were converted to a 0-100% scale. The Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare RQS scores and review features.ResultsThe literature research yielded 345 articles, from which 44 systematic reviews were finally included in the analysis. Overall, the median of RQS was 21.00% (IQR = 11.50). No significant differences of RQS were observed in subgroup analyses according to targets (oncological/not oncological target, neuroradiology/body imaging focus and one imaging technique/more than one imaging technique, characterization/prognosis/detection/other).ConclusionsOur review did not reveal a significant difference of quality of radiomic articles reported in systematic reviews, divided in different subgroups. Furthermore, low overall methodological quality of radiomics research was found independent of specific application domains. While the RQS can serve as a reference tool to improve future study designs, future research should also be aimed at improving its reliability and developing new tools to meet an ever-evolving research space.Key points• Radiomics is a promising high-throughput method that may generate novel imaging biomarkers to improve clinical decision-making process, but it is an inherently complex analysis and often lacks reproducibility and generalizability. • The Radiomics Quality Score serves a necessary role as the de facto reference tool for assessing radiomics studies. • External auditing of radiomics studies, in addition to the standard peer-review process, is valuable to highlight common limitations and provide insights to improve future study designs and practical applicability of the radiomics models.

Project description:ObjectivesThe study aim was to conduct a systematic review of the literature reporting the application of radiomics to imaging techniques in patients with ovarian lesions.MethodsMEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, Ovid and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant articles. Using PRISMA criteria, data were extracted from short-listed studies. Validity and bias were assessed independently by 2 researchers in consensus using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Radiomic Quality Score (RQS) was utilised to assess radiomic methodology.ResultsAfter duplicate removal, 63 articles were identified, of which 33 were eligible. Fifteen assessed lesion classifications, 10 treatment outcomes, 5 outcome predictions, 2 metastatic disease predictions and 1 classification/outcome prediction. The sample size ranged from 28 to 501 patients. Twelve studies investigated CT, 11 MRI, 4 ultrasound and 1 FDG PET-CT. Twenty-three studies (70%) incorporated 3D segmentation. Various modelling methods were used, most commonly LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) (10/33). Five studies (15%) compared radiomic models to radiologist interpretation, all demonstrating superior performance. Only 6 studies (18%) included external validation. Five studies (15%) had a low overall risk of bias, 9 (27%) moderate, and 19 (58%) high risk of bias. The highest RQS achieved was 61.1%, and the lowest was - 16.7%.ConclusionRadiomics has the potential as a clinical diagnostic tool in patients with ovarian masses and may allow better lesion stratification, guiding more personalised patient care in the future. Standardisation of the feature extraction methodology, larger and more diverse patient cohorts and real-world evaluation is required before clinical translation.Clinical relevance statementRadiomics shows promising results in improving lesion stratification, treatment selection and outcome prediction. Modelling with larger cohorts and real-world evaluation is required before clinical translation.Key points• Radiomics is emerging as a tool for enhancing clinical decisions in patients with ovarian masses. • Radiomics shows promising results in improving lesion stratification, treatment selection and outcome prediction. • Modelling with larger cohorts and real-world evaluation is required before clinical translation.

Project description:Rationale and objectivesThe management of complex renal cysts is guided by the Bosniak classification system, which may be inadequate for risk stratification of patients to determine the appropriate intervention. Radiomics models based on CT imaging may provide additional useful information.Materials and methodsA total of 322 patients with Bosniak II-IV cysts were included in the study from January 2010 to December 2019. Contrast-enhanced CT scans were performed on all patients. ITK-snap was used for segmentation, and the PyRadiomics 3.0.1 package was used for feature extraction. The radiomics features were screened via the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression method. After feature selection, a logistic regression (LR) model, support vector machine (SVM) model and random forest (RF) model were constructed.ResultsIn the present study, 217 benign renal cysts (67.4%) and 105 cystic renal cell carcinomas (32.6%) were identified. According to the Bosniak classification, the sample included 179 (55.6%) Bosniak II cysts, 38 (11.8%) Bosniak IIF cysts, 44 (13.7%) Bosniak III cysts and 61 (18.9%) Bosniak IV cysts. A total of 1334 radiomics features were extracted from both unenhanced and cortical CT scans. After LASSO regression, all the models (LR, SVM and RF) showed satisfactory discrimination and reliability in both unenhanced and cortical CT scans (AUC > 0.950). In the Bosniak IIF-III subgroup analysis, the diagnostic accuracy of the LR model was very low for both the unenhanced and cortical scans. In contrast, the SVM model and RF model showed excellent and stable performance in classifying Bosniak IIF-III cysts. The AUCs of the models were all > 0.85, with a maximum of 0.941. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC of the RF model were 0.889, 0.913, 0.902, and 0.941, respectively.ConclusionOur data indicate that radiomics models can effectively distinguish between cystic renal cell carcinoma (cRCC) and complex renal cysts (Bosniak II-IV). Radiomics models may still have high diagnostic accuracy even for Bosniak IIF-III cysts that are clinically difficult to distinguish. However, external validation of these findings is still needed.

Dataset Information

Radiomics quality score in renal masses: a systematic assessment on current literature.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Advances in knowledge

Publications

Radiomics quality score in renal masses: a systematic assessment on current literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets