Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33604303›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2020

Comparison of Radiomic Models Based on Low-Dose and Standard-Dose CT for Prediction of Adenocarcinomas and Benign Lesions in Solid Pulmonary Nodules.

Jieke Liu, Hao Xu, Haomiao Qing, Yong Li, Xi Yang, Changjiu He, Jing Ren, Peng Zhou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Risk prediction for lung cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-regression.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Feature selection methods and predictive models in CT lung cancer radiomics.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jieke LiuDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Hao XuDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Haomiao QingDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Yong LiDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xi YangDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Changjiu HeDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Jing RenDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Peng ZhouDepartment of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Sichuan Cancer Hospital · CNUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aimed to develop radiomic models based on low-dose CT (LDCT) and standard-dose CT to distinguish adenocarcinomas from benign lesions in patients with solid solitary pulmonary nodules and compare the performance among these radiomic models and Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS). The reproducibility of radiomic features between LDCT and standard-dose CT were also evaluated.

methodsA total of 141 consecutive pathologically confirmed solid solitary pulmonary nodules were enrolled including 50 adenocarcinomas and 48 benign nodules in primary cohort and 22 adenocarcinomas and 21 benign nodules in validation cohort. LDCT and standard-dose CT scans were conducted using same acquisition parameters and reconstruction method except for radiation dose. All nodules were automatically segmented and 104 original radiomic features were extracted. The concordance correlation coefficient was used to quantify reproducibility of radiomic features between LDCT and standard-dose CT. Radiomic features were selected to build radiomic signature, and clinical characteristics and radiomic signature were combined to develop radiomic nomogram for LDCT and standard-dose CT, respectively. The performance of radiomic models and Lung-RADS was assessed by area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity.

resultsShape and first order features, and neighboring gray tone difference matrix features were highly reproducible between LDCT and standard-dose CT. No significant differences of AUCs were found among radiomic signature and nomogram of LDCT and standard-dose CT in both primary and validation cohort (0.915

conclusionsThe diagnostic performance of LDCT-based radiomic models to differentiate adenocarcinomas from benign lesions in solid pulmonary nodules were equivalent to that of standard-dose CT. The LDCT-based radiomic model with higher specificity and lower false-positive rate than Lung-RADS might help reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment of solid pulmonary nodules in lung cancer screening.

Indexed as

benign lesionlow-dose computed tomographylung adenocarcinomalung cancer screeningradiomicssolid pulmonary nodule

Identifiers

PMID33604303
PMCPMC7884759
OpenAlexW3126633302

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.