Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30231314›Full record

ReviewAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting2018

Novel Quantitative Imaging for Predicting Response to Therapy: Techniques and Clinical Applications.

Kaustav Bera, Vamsidhar Velcheti, Anant Madabhushi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kaustav BeraFrom the Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH.
Vamsidhar VelchetiFrom the Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH.
Anant MadabhushiFrom the Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH.

Funding

Computerized histologic image predictor of cancer outcomeR01CA202752 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI FELDMAN, MICHAEL D, GANESAN, SHRIDAR · 2016 to 2020
$3.1M
Quantitative Histomorphometric Risk Classifier (QuHbIC) in HPV + Oropharyngeal CarcinomaR01CA220581 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI KOYFMAN, SHLOMO, LEWIS, JAMES · 2018 to 2023
$3.1M
Computerized Histologic Risk Predictor (CHiRP) for Early Stage Lung CancersR01CA216579 · NCI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI FU, PINGFU, LLOYD, MARK · 2018 to 2023
$3.1M
MR Fingerprinting and Computerized Decision Support for Prostate CancerR01CA208236 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI GULANI, VIKAS, PONSKY, LEE EVAN · 2017 to 2022
$3.0M
Pathology Image Informatics Platform for visualization, analysis and managementU24CA199374 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI GURCAN, METIN NAFI, MADABHUSHI, ANANT · 2015 to 2019
$2.9M
Computerized morphologic-molecular predictor of progression in DCISR21CA195152 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI BADVE, SUNIL S., MADABHUSHI, ANANT · 2015 to 2016
$388k
BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH FACILITIESC06RR012463 · NCRR · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI KUTINA, KENNETH L · 1997 to 1997
–
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA202752NCI NIH HHS R01 CA208236NCI NIH HHS R01 CA216579NCI NIH HHS R01 CA220581NCI NIH HHS R21 CA195152NCI NIH HHS U24 CA199374NCRR NIH HHS C06 RR012463
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current standard of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)-based tumor response evaluation is limited in its ability to accurately monitor treatment response. Radiomics, an approach involving computerized extraction of several quantitative imaging features, has shown promise in predicting as well as monitoring response to therapy. In this article, we provide a brief overview of radiomic approaches and the various analytical methods and techniques, specifically in the context of predicting and monitoring treatment response for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We briefly summarize some of the various types of radiomic features, including tumor shape and textural patterns, both within the tumor and within the adjacent tumor microenvironment. Additionally, we also discuss work in delta-radiomics or change in radiomic features (e.g., texture within the nodule) across longitudinally interspersed images in time for monitoring changes in therapy. We discuss the utility of these approaches for NSCLC, specifically the role of radiomics as a prognostic marker for treatment effectiveness and early therapy response, including chemoradiation, immunotherapy, and trimodality therapy.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingCombined Modality TherapyHumansLung NeoplasmsMultimodal ImagingNeoplasmsPrognosisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID30231314
PMCPMC6152883

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.