Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34868905›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Diagnostic Performance of 2D and 3D T2WI-Based Radiomics Features With Machine Learning Algorithms to Distinguish Solid Solitary Pulmonary Lesion.

Qi Wan, Jiaxuan Zhou, Xiaoying Xia, Jianfeng Hu, Peng Wang, Yu Peng, Tianjing Zhang, Jianqing Sun, Yang Song, Guang Yang and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. 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
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Qi WanDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Jiaxuan ZhouDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaoying XiaDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Jianfeng HuDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Peng WangDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Yu PengDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Tianjing ZhangPhilips Healthcare, Guangzhou, China.
Jianqing SunPhilips Healthcare, Guangzhou, China.
Yang SongShanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.
Guang YangShanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.
Xinchun LiDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University · CNGuangzhou Medical University · CNEast China Normal University · CNPhilips (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the performance of 2D and 3D radiomics features with different machine learning approaches to classify SPLs based on magnetic resonance(MR) T2 weighted imaging (T2WI). MATERIAL AND

methodsA total of 132 patients with pathologically confirmed SPLs were examined and randomly divided into training (n = 92) and test datasets (n = 40). A total of 1692 3D and 1231 2D radiomics features per patient were extracted. Both radiomics features and clinical data were evaluated. A total of 1260 classification models, comprising 3 normalization methods, 2 dimension reduction algorithms, 3 feature selection methods, and 10 classifiers with 7 different feature numbers (confined to 3-9), were compared. The ten-fold cross-validation on the training dataset was applied to choose the candidate final model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), precision-recall plot, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient were used to evaluate the performance of machine learning approaches.

resultsThe 3D features were significantly superior to 2D features, showing much more machine learning combinations with AUC greater than 0.7 in both validation and test groups (129 vs. 11). The feature selection method Analysis of Variance(ANOVA), Recursive Feature Elimination(RFE) and the classifier Logistic Regression(LR), Linear Discriminant Analysis(LDA), Support Vector Machine(SVM), Gaussian Process(GP) had relatively better performance. The best performance of 3D radiomics features in the test dataset (AUC = 0.824, AUC-PR = 0.927, MCC = 0.514) was higher than that of 2D features (AUC = 0.740, AUC-PR = 0.846, MCC = 0.404). The joint 3D and 2D features (AUC=0.813, AUC-PR = 0.926, MCC = 0.563) showed similar results as 3D features. Incorporating clinical features with 3D and 2D radiomics features slightly improved the AUC to 0.836 (AUC-PR = 0.918, MCC = 0.620) and 0.780 (AUC-PR = 0.900, MCC = 0.574), respectively.

conclusionsAfter algorithm optimization, 2D feature-based radiomics models yield favorable results in differentiating malignant and benign SPLs, but 3D features are still preferred because of the availability of more machine learning algorithmic combinations with better performance. Feature selection methods ANOVA and RFE, and classifier LR, LDA, SVM and GP are more likely to demonstrate better diagnostic performance for 3D features in the current study.

Indexed as

algorithmsarea under the curvelung neoplasmsmachine learningmagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID34868905
PMCPMC8637439
OpenAlexW3211635392

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.