Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34633438›Full record

SynthesisBJS open2021

Is radiomic MRI a feasible alternative to OncotypeDX® recurrence score testing? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

M G Davey, M S Davey, É J Ryan, M R Boland, P F McAnena, A J Lowery, M J Kerin

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJS open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M G DaveyDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-9892-9920
M S DaveyDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
É J RyanDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
M R BolandDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-9024-8189
P F McAnenaDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
A J LoweryDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
M J KerinDepartment of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOncotypeDX® recurrence score (RS) aids therapeutic decision-making in oestrogen-receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer. Radiomics is an evolving field that aims to examine the relationship between radiological features and the underlying genomic landscape of disease processes. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of current evidence evaluating the comparability of radiomics and RS.

methodsA systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing radiomic MRI tumour analyses and RS were identified. Sensitivity, specificity and area under curve (AUC) delineating low risk (RS less than 18) versus intermediate-high risk (equal to or greater than 18) and low-intermediate risk (RS less than 30) and high risk (RS greater than 30) were recorded. Log rate ratios (lnRR) and standard error were determined from AUC and 95 per cent confidence intervals.

resultsNine studies including 1216 patients met inclusion criteria; the mean age at diagnosis was 52.9 years. Mean RS was 16 (range 0-75); 401 patients with RS less than 18, 287 patients with RS 18-30 and 100 patients with RS greater than 30. Radiomic analysis and RS were comparable for differentiating RS less than 18 versus RS 18 or greater (RR 0.93 (95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 1.01); P = 0.010, heterogeneity (I2)=0%) as well as RS less than 30 versus RS 30 or greater (RR 0.76 (95 per cent c.i. 0.70 to 0.83); P < 0.001, I2=0%). MRI sensitivity and specificity for RS less than 18 versus 18 or greater was 0.89 (95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 0.93) and 0.72 (95 per cent c.i. 0.66 to 0.78) respectively, and 0.79 (95 per cent c.i. 0.72 to 0.86) and 0.74 (95 per cent c.i. 0.68 to 0.80) for RS less than 30 versus 30 or greater.

conclusionRadiomic tumour analysis is comparable to RS in differentiating patients into clinically relevant subgroups. For patients requiring MRI, radiomics may complement and enhance RS for prognostication and therapeutic decision making in ER+ breast cancer.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingArea Under CurveFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID34633438
PMCPMC8504445
OpenAlexW3205610816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.