Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32642254›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2020

Do we need to see to believe?-radiomics for lung nodule classification and lung cancer risk stratification.

Ali Khawaja, Brian J Bartholmai, Srinivasan Rajagopalan, Ronald A Karwoski, Cyril Varghese, Fabien Maldonado, Tobias Peikert

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Feature selection methods and predictive models in CT lung cancer radiomics.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Bibliometrics research on radiomics of lung cancer.Translational cancer research · 2021
    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

7 authors.

Ali KhawajaDivison of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Brian J BartholmaiDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Srinivasan RajagopalanBiomedical Imaging Resource, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Ronald A KarwoskiBiomedical Imaging Resource, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Cyril VargheseDivison of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Fabien MaldonadoDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Tobias PeikertDivison of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite multiple recent advances, the diagnosis and management of lung cancer remain challenging and it continues to be the deadliest malignancy. In 2011, the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported 20% reduction in lung cancer related mortality using annual low dose chest computed tomography (CT). These results led to the approval and nationwide establishment of lung cancer CT-based lung cancer screening programs. These findings have been further validated by the recently published Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek (NELSON) and Multicentric Italian Lung Detection (MILD) trials, the latter showing benefit of screening even beyond the 5 years. However, the implementation of lung cancer screening has been impeded by several challenges, including the differentiation between benign and malignant nodules, the large number of false positive studies and the detection of indolent, potentially clinically insignificant lung cancers (overdiagnosis). Hence, the development of non-invasive strategies to accurately classify and risk stratify screen-detected pulmonary nodules in order to individualize clinical management remains a high priority area of research. Radiomics is a recently coined term which refers to the process of imaging feature extraction and quantitative analysis of clinical diagnostic images to characterize the nodule phenotype beyond what is possible with conventional radiologist assessment. Even though it is still in early phase, several studies have already demonstrated that radiomics approaches are potentially useful for lung nodule classification, risk stratification, individualized management and prediction of overall prognosis. The goal of this review is to summarize the current literature regarding the radiomics of screen-detected lung nodules, highlight potential challenges and discuss its clinical application along with future goals and challenges.

Indexed as

imaging biomarkerLung cancerpulmonary noduleradiomicsrisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID32642254
PMCPMC7330769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.