ArticleTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.)2020
Multisite Technical and Clinical Performance Evaluation of Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers from 3D FDG PET Segmentations of Head and Neck Cancer Images.
Article in Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Joint EANM/SNMMI guideline on radiomics in nuclear medicine : Jointly supported by the EANM Physics Committee and the SNMMI Physics, Instrumentation and Data Sciences Council.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Guideline
- Enhancing Clinical Reliability in Automated Pressure Injury Measurement: Challenges and Future Directions.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Review
- Experimental phantom evaluation to identify robust positron emission tomography (PET) radiomic features.EJNMMI physics · 2021Article
- Quantitative Imaging Enters the Clinical Arena: A Personal Viewpoint.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2020Article
- Free three-dimensional image software in local extension assessment of oral squamous cell carcinoma: a pilot study.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) provide medical image-derived intensity, texture, shape, and size features that may help characterize cancerous tumors and predict clinical outcomes. Successful clinical translation of QIBs depends on the robustness of their measurements. Biomarkers derived from positron emission tomography images are prone to measurement errors owing to differences in image processing factors such as the tumor segmentation method used to define volumes of interest over which to calculate QIBs. We illustrate a new Bayesian statistical approach to characterize the robustness of QIBs to different processing factors. Study data consist of 22 QIBs measured on 47 head and neck tumors in 10 positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans segmented manually and with semiautomated methods used by 7 institutional members of the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network. QIB performance is estimated and compared across institutions with respect to measurement errors and power to recover statistical associations with clinical outcomes. Analysis findings summarize the performance impact of different segmentation methods used by Quantitative Imaging Network members. Robustness of some advanced biomarkers was found to be similar to conventional markers, such as maximum standardized uptake value. Such similarities support current pursuits to better characterize disease and predict outcomes by developing QIBs that use more imaging information and are robust to different processing factors. Nevertheless, to ensure reproducibility of QIB measurements and measures of association with clinical outcomes, errors owing to segmentation methods need to be reduced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.