Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31166787›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2019

Non-invasive classification of non-small cell lung cancer: a comparison between random forest models utilising radiomic and semantic features.

Usman Bashir, Bhavin Kawa, Muhammad Siddique, Sze Mun Mak, Arjun Nair, Emma Mclean, Andrea Bille, Vicky Goh, Gary Cook

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Feature selection methods and predictive models in CT lung cancer radiomics.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Frontiers in oncology · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

9 authors.

Usman Bashir1 Cancer Imaging Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London , London , UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4888-8961
Bhavin Kawa2 Department of Radiology, Maidstone Hospital, Hermitage Lane , Maidstone , UK.
Muhammad Siddique1 Cancer Imaging Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London , London , UK.
Sze Mun Mak3 Department of Radiology, Guy's Hospital, Great Maze Pond , London , UK.
Arjun Nair3 Department of Radiology, Guy's Hospital, Great Maze Pond , London , UK.
Emma Mclean4 Department of Pathology, Guy's Hospital and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Westminster Bridge Rd, Lambeth , London , UK.
Andrea Bille5 Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy's Hospital, Great Maze Pond , London , UK.
Vicky Goh3 Department of Radiology, Guy's Hospital, Great Maze Pond , London , UK.
Gary Cook6 PET Imaging Centre and the Division of Imaging Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, King's College London, , UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16463Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveNon-invasive distinction between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma subtypes of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may be beneficial to patients unfit for invasive diagnostic procedures or when tissue is insufficient for diagnosis. The purpose of our study was to compare the performance of random forest algorithms utilizing CT radiomics and/or semantic features in classifying NSCLC.

methodsTwo thoracic radiologists scored 11 semantic features on CT scans of 106 patients with NSCLC. A set of 115 radiomics features was extracted from the CT scans. Random forest models were developed from semantic (RM-sem), radiomics (RM-rad), and all features combined (RM-all). External validation of models was performed using an independent test data set (

resultsThe median (interquartile-range) error rates of the models were: RF-sem 24.5 % (22.6 - 37.5 %), RF-rad 35.8 % (34.9 - 38.7 %), and RM-all 37.7 % (37.7 - 37.7). On training data, both RF-rad and RF-all gave perfect discrimination (AUC = 1), which was significantly higher than that achieved by RF-sem (AUC = 0.78;

conclusionNon-invasive classification of NSCLC can be done accurately using random forest classification models based on well-known CT-derived descriptive features. However, radiomics-based classification models performed poorly in this scenario when tested on independent data and should be used with caution, due to their possible lack of generalizability to new data. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Our study describes novel CT-derived random forest models based on radiologist-interpretation of CT scans (semantic features) that can assist NSCLC classification when histopathology is equivocal or when histopathological sampling is not possible. It also shows that random forest models based on semantic features may be more useful than those built from computational radiomic features.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCarcinoma, Squamous CellFemaleHumansLungLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedRadiometryReproducibility of ResultsSemantics

Identifiers

PMID31166787
PMCPMC6636267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.