Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34205631›Full record

ArticleCancers2021

The Challenge of Choosing the Best Classification Method in Radiomic Analyses: Recommendations and Applications to Lung Cancer CT Images.

Federica Corso, Giulia Tini, Giuliana Lo Presti, Noemi Garau, Simone Pietro De Angelis, Federica Bellerba, Lisa Rinaldi, Francesca Botta, Stefania Rizzo, Daniela Origgi and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

18 authors.

Federica CorsoDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4947-9628
Giulia TiniDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2616-3962
Giuliana Lo PrestiMedical Physics Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Noemi GarauDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering (DEIB), Politecnico di Milano, via Ponzio 34, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Simone Pietro De AngelisMolecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.
Federica BellerbaMolecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5956-4340
Lisa RinaldiRadiation Research Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Giuseppe Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0784-0849
Francesca BottaMedical Physics Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Stefania RizzoClinica di Radiologia EOC, Istituto Imaging della Svizzera Italiana (IIMSI), via Tesserete 46, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5151-0866
Daniela OriggiMedical Physics Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Chiara PaganelliDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering (DEIB), Politecnico di Milano, via Ponzio 34, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4787-8649
Marta CremonesiRadiation Research Unit, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Giuseppe Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Cristiano RampinelliDivision of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Massimo BellomiDivision of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Luca MazzarellaDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.
Pier Giuseppe PelicciDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.
Sara GandiniMolecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1348-4548
Sara RaimondiMolecular and Pharmaco-Epidemiology Unit, Department of Experimental Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, via Adamello 16, 20139 Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiomics uses high-dimensional sets of imaging features to predict biological characteristics of tumors and clinical outcomes. The choice of the algorithm used to analyze radiomic features and perform predictions has a high impact on the results, thus the identification of adequate machine learning methods for radiomic applications is crucial. In this study we aim to identify suitable approaches of analysis for radiomic-based binary predictions, according to sample size, outcome balancing and the features-outcome association strength. Simulated data were obtained reproducing the correlation structure among 168 radiomic features extracted from Computed Tomography images of 270 Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients and the associated to lymph node status. Performances of six classifiers combined with six feature selection (FS) methods were assessed on the simulated data using AUC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curves), sensitivity, and specificity. For all the FS methods and regardless of the association strength, the tree-based classifiers Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting obtained good performances (AUC ≥ 0.73), showing the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity. On small samples, performances were generally lower than in large-medium samples and with larger variations. FS methods generally did not improve performances. Thus, in radiomic studies, we suggest evaluating the choice of FS and classifiers, considering specific sample size, balancing, and association strength.

Indexed as

balancingclassificationCT imagesfeature selectionlung cancermachine learningradiomicssample sizesignalsimulation

Identifiers

PMID34205631
PMCPMC8234634

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.