Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33947428›Full record

ArticleJournal of translational medicine2021

Optimizing the timing of diagnostic testing after positive findings in lung cancer screening: a proof of concept radiomics study.

Zixing Wang, Ning Li, Fuling Zheng, Xin Sui, Wei Han, Fang Xue, Xiaoli Xu, Cuihong Yang, Yaoda Hu, Lei Wang and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zixing WangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ning LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Fuling ZhengDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Xin SuiDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Wei HanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Fang XueDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xiaoli XuDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Cuihong YangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yaoda HuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Lei WangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wei SongDepartment of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. cjr.songwei@vip.163.com.
Jingmei JiangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. jingmeijiang@ibms.pumc.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-7787-7607
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNCapital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe timeliness of diagnostic testing after positive screening remains suboptimal because of limited evidence and methodology, leading to delayed diagnosis of lung cancer and over-examination. We propose a radiomics approach to assist with planning of the diagnostic testing interval in lung cancer screening.

methodsFrom an institute-based lung cancer screening cohort, we retrospectively selected 92 patients with pulmonary nodules with diameters ≥ 3 mm at baseline (61 confirmed as lung cancer by histopathology; 31 confirmed cancer-free). Four groups of region-of-interest-based radiomic features (n = 310) were extracted for quantitative characterization of the nodules, and eight features were proven to be predictive of cancer diagnosis, noise-robust, phenotype-related, and non-redundant. A radiomics biomarker was then built with the random survival forest method. The patients with nodules were divided into low-, middle- and high-risk subgroups by two biomarker cutoffs that optimized time-dependent sensitivity and specificity for decisions about diagnostic workup within 3 months and about repeat screening after 12 months, respectively. A radiomics-based follow-up schedule was then proposed. Its performance was visually assessed with a time-to-diagnosis plot and benchmarked against lung RADS and four other guideline protocols.

resultsThe radiomics biomarker had a high time-dependent area under the curve value (95% CI) for predicting lung cancer diagnosis within 12 months; training: 0.928 (0.844, 0.972), test: 0.888 (0.766, 0.975); the performance was robust in extensive cross-validations. The time-to-diagnosis distributions differed significantly between the three patient subgroups, p < 0.001: 96.2% of high-risk patients (n = 26) were diagnosed within 10 months after baseline screen, whereas 95.8% of low-risk patients (n = 24) remained cancer-free by the end of the study. Compared with the five existing protocols, the proposed follow-up schedule performed best at securing timely lung cancer diagnosis (delayed diagnosis rate: < 5%) and at sparing patients with cancer-free nodules from unnecessary repeat screenings and examinations (false recommendation rate: 0%).

conclusionsTimely management of screening-detected pulmonary nodules can be substantially improved with a radiomics approach. This proof-of-concept study's results should be further validated in large programs.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsMultiple Pulmonary NodulesEarly Detection of CancerHumansRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedFollow-upLung cancer screeningPulmonary nodule managementRadiomics biomarkerTime-dependent analysis

Identifiers

PMID33947428
PMCPMC8094528
OpenAlexW3157158973

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.