Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32248822›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2020

Radiomics analysis of contrast-enhanced CT predicts lymphovascular invasion and disease outcome in gastric cancer: a preliminary study.

Xiaofeng Chen, Zhiqi Yang, Jiada Yang, Yuting Liao, Peipei Pang, Weixiong Fan, Xiangguang Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Prediction of lymphovascular invasion in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma by computed tomography-based radiomics analysis: 2D or 3D ?Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiaofeng ChenDepartment of Radiology, Meizhou People's Hospital, Meizhou, Guangdong, 514031, People's Republic of China.
Zhiqi YangDepartment of Radiology, Meizhou People's Hospital, Meizhou, Guangdong, 514031, People's Republic of China.
Jiada YangDepartment of Radiology, Meizhou People's Hospital, Meizhou, Guangdong, 514031, People's Republic of China.
Yuting LiaoGE Healthcare, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People's Republic of China, 510623.
Peipei PangGE Healthcare, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People's Republic of China, 311100.
Weixiong FanDepartment of Radiology, Meizhou People's Hospital, Meizhou, Guangdong, 514031, People's Republic of China.
Xiangguang ChenDepartment of Radiology, Meizhou People's Hospital, Meizhou, Guangdong, 514031, People's Republic of China. cxg966504@163.com.
Meizhou City People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo determine whether radiomics features based on contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) can preoperatively predict lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and clinical outcome in gastric cancer (GC) patients.

methodsIn total, 160 surgically resected patients were retrospectively analyzed, and seven predictive models were constructed. Three radiomics predictive models were built from radiomics features based on arterial (A), venous (V) and combination of two phase (A + V) images. Then, three Radscores (A-Radscore, V-Radscore and A + V-Radscore) were obtained. Another four predictive models were constructed by the three Radscores and clinical risk factors through multivariate logistic regression. A nomogram was developed to predict LVI by incorporating A + V-Radscore and clinical risk factors. Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test were utilized to analyze the outcome of LVI.

resultsRadiomics related to tumor size and intratumoral inhomogeneity were the top-ranked LVI predicting features. The related Radscores showed significant differences according to LVI status (P < 0.01). Univariate logistic analysis identified three clinical features (T stage, N stage and AJCC stage) and three Radscores as LVI predictive factors. The Clinical-Radscore (namely, A + V + C) model that used all these factors showed a higher performance (AUC = 0.856) than the clinical (namely, C, including T stage, N stage and AJCC stage) model (AUC = 0.810) and the A + V-Radscore model (AUC = 0.795) in the train cohort. For patients without LVI and with LVI, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.5 and 8.0 months (P < 0.001),and the median OS was 20.2 and 17.0 months (P = 0.3), respectively. In the Clinical-Radscore-predicted LVI absent and LVI present groups, the median PFS was 11.0 and 8.0 months (P = 0.03), and the median OS was 20.0 and 18.0 months (P = 0.05), respectively. N stage, LVI status and Clinical-Radscore-predicted LVI status were associated with disease-specific recurrence or mortality.

conclusionsRadiomics features based on CECT may serve as potential markers to successfully predict LVI and PFS, but no evidence was found that these features were related to OS. Considering that it is a single central study, multi-center validation studies will be required in the future to verify its clinical feasibility.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisStomach NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedClinical outcomeGastric cancerLymphovascular invasionRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID32248822
PMCPMC7132895
OpenAlexW3015058324

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.