Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32940755›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2021

High-resolution MRI-based radiomics analysis to predict lymph node metastasis and tumor deposits respectively in rectal cancer.

Yan-Song Yang, Feng Feng, Yong-Juan Qiu, Gui-Hua Zheng, Ya-Qiong Ge, Yue-Tao Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Machine learning prediction model for lateral lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yan-Song YangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, No.185, Juqian Street, Changzhou, 213003, Jiangsu, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3433-4351
Feng FengDepartment of Radiology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Yong-Juan QiuDepartment of Radiology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Gui-Hua ZhengDepartment of Pathology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, Jiangsu, China.
Ya-Qiong GeGE Healthcare, Shanghai, 210000, China.
Yue-Tao WangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, No.185, Juqian Street, Changzhou, 213003, Jiangsu, China. yuetao-w@163.com.
Nantong University · CNSoochow University · CNUnited Imaging Healthcare (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo establish and validate two predictive radiomics models for preoperative prediction of lymph node metastases (LNMs) and tumor deposits (TDs) respectively in rectal cancer (RC) patients.

methodsA total of 139 RC patients (98 in the training cohort and 41 in the validation cohort) were enrolled in the present study. High-resolution magnetic resonance images (HRMRI) were retrieved for tumor segmentation and feature extraction. HRMRI findings of RC were assessed by three experienced radiologists. Two radiomics nomograms were established by integrating the clinical risk factors, HRMRI findings and radiomics signature.

resultsThe predictive nomogram of LNMs showed good predictive performance (area under the curve [AUC], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83-0.96) which was better than clinico-radiological (AUC, 0.83; 95% CI 0.74-0.93; Delong test, p = 0.017) or radiomics signature-only model (AUC, 0.77; 95% CI 0.67-0.86; Delong test, p = 0.003) in training cohort. Application of the nomogram in the validation cohort still exhibited good performance (AUC, 0.87; 95% CI 0.76-0.98). The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the combined model in predicting LNMs was 0.86,0.79 and 0.91 in training cohort and 0.83,0.85 and 0.82 in validation cohort. As for TDs, the predictive efficacy of the nomogram (AUC, 0.82; 95% CI 0.71-0.93) was not significantly higher than radiomics signature-only model (AUC, 0.80; 95% CI 0.69-0.92; Delong test, p = 0.71). Radiomics signature-only model was adopted to predict TDs with accuracy=0.76, sensitivity=0.72 and specificity=0.94 in training cohort and 0.68, 0.62 and 0.97 in validation cohort.

conclusionHRMRI-based radiomics models could be helpful for the prediction of LNMs and TDs preoperatively in RC patients.

Indexed as

Extranodal ExtensionRectal NeoplasmsHumansLymphatic MetastasisMagnetic Resonance ImagingRetrospective StudiesLymph nodesMagnetic resonance imagingNomogramRadiomicsRectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID32940755
OpenAlexW3087069475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.