Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32758279›Full record

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

Radiomics for glioblastoma survival analysis in pre-operative MRI: exploring feature robustness, class boundaries, and machine learning techniques.

Yannick Suter, Urspeter Knecht, Mariana Alão, Waldo Valenzuela, Ekkehard Hewer, Philippe Schucht, Roland Wiest, Mauricio Reyes

Abstract 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 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Yannick SuterARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. yannick.suter@artorg.unibe.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1822-948X
Urspeter KnechtRadiology Department, Spital Emmental, Burgdorf and Langnau, Switzerland.
Mariana AlãoARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Waldo ValenzuelaInsel Data Science Center, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Murtenstrasse 42, CH-3008, Bern, Switzerland.
Ekkehard HewerInstitute of Pathology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Philippe SchuchtDepartment of Neurosurgery, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.
Roland WiestSupport Center for Advanced Neuroimaging, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.
Mauricio ReyesInsel Data Science Center, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Murtenstrasse 42, CH-3008, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

Krebsliga Schweiz KFS-3979-08-2016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aims to identify robust radiomic features for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), assess feature selection and machine learning methods for overall survival classification of Glioblastoma multiforme patients, and to robustify models trained on single-center data when applied to multi-center data.

methodsTumor regions were automatically segmented on MRI data, and 8327 radiomic features extracted from these regions. Single-center data was perturbed to assess radiomic feature robustness, with over 16 million tests of typical perturbations. Robust features were selected based on the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient to measure agreement across perturbations. Feature selectors and machine learning methods were compared to classify overall survival. Models trained on single-center data (63 patients) were tested on multi-center data (76 patients). Priors using feature robustness and clinical knowledge were evaluated.

resultsWe observed a very large performance drop when applying models trained on single-center on unseen multi-center data, e.g. a decrease of the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.56 for the overall survival classification boundary at 1 year. By using robust features alongside priors for two overall survival classes, the AUC drop could be reduced by 21.2%. In contrast, sensitivity was 12.19% lower when applying a prior.

conclusionsOur experiments show that it is possible to attain improved levels of robustness and accuracy when models need to be applied to unseen multi-center data. The performance on multi-center data of models trained on single-center data can be increased by using robust features and introducing prior knowledge. For successful model robustification, tailoring perturbations for robustness testing to the target dataset is key.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAdultAgedBrain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedSurvival AnalysisGlioblastoma multiformeMRI radiomicsMulti-centerOverall survival classificationRobustness

Identifiers

PMID32758279
PMCPMC7405445

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.