Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31250180›Full record

Trial reportAbdominal radiology (New York)2019

Radiomics-based prediction of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer at initial computed tomography evaluation.

Jennifer S Golia Pernicka, Johan Gagniere, Jayasree Chakraborty, Rikiya Yamashita, Lorenzo Nardo, John M Creasy, Iva Petkovska, Richard R K Do, David D B Bates, Viktoriya Paroder and 4 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Radiomics in colorectal cancer patients.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors.

Jennifer S Golia PernickaBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA. goliapej@mskcc.org.ORCID 0000-0002-1076-7948
Johan GagniereDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Jayasree ChakrabortyDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Rikiya YamashitaBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Lorenzo NardoBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
John M CreasyDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Iva PetkovskaBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Richard R K DoBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
David D B BatesBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Viktoriya ParoderBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Mithat GonenDepartment of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Martin R WeiserDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Amber L SimpsonDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Marc J GollubBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th St., Suite 757, New York, NY, 10065, USA.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center CC50367NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo predict microsatellite instability (MSI) status of colon cancer on preoperative CT imaging using radiomic analysis.

methodsThis retrospective study involved radiomic analysis of preoperative CT imaging of patients who underwent resection of stage II-III colon cancer from 2004 to 2012. A radiologist blinded to MSI status manually segmented the tumor region on CT images. 254 Intensity-based radiomic features were extracted from the tumor region. Three prediction models were developed with (1) only clinical features, (2) only radiomic features, and (3) "combined" clinical and radiomic features. Patients were randomly separated into training (n = 139) and test (n = 59) sets. The model was constructed from training data only; the test set was reserved for validation only. Model performance was evaluated using AUC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV.

resultsOf the total 198 patients, 134 (68%) patients had microsatellite stable tumors and 64 (32%) patients had MSI tumors. The combined model performed slightly better than the other models, predicting MSI with an AUC of 0.80 for the training set and 0.79 for the test set (specificity = 96.8% and 92.5%, respectively), whereas the model with only clinical features achieved an AUC of 0.74 and the model with only radiomic features achieved an AUC of 0.76. The model with clinical features alone had the lowest specificity (70%) compared with the model with radiomic features alone (95%) and the combined model (92.5%).

conclusionsPreoperative prediction of MSI status via radiomic analysis of preoperative CT adds specificity to clinical assessment and could contribute to personalized treatment selection.

Indexed as

Microsatellite InstabilityTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overColorectal NeoplasmsContrast MediaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityContrast MediaColonColonic neoplasmsImmunotherapyMicrosatellite instabilityMicrosatellite repeats

Identifiers

PMID31250180
PMCPMC6824954

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.