Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34976794›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

A Comparative Study of Radiomics and Deep-Learning Based Methods for Pulmonary Nodule Malignancy Prediction in Low Dose CT Images.

Mehdi Astaraki, Guang Yang, Yousuf Zakko, Iuliana Toma-Dasu, Örjan Smedby, Chunliang Wang

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 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Mehdi AstarakiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Huddinge, Sweden.
Guang YangCardiovascular Research Centre, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Yousuf ZakkoImaging and Function, Radiology Department, Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Stockholm, Sweden.
Iuliana Toma-DasuDepartment of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Örjan SmedbyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Huddinge, Sweden.
Chunliang WangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Huddinge, Sweden.
KTH Royal Institute of Technology · SEImperial College London · GBKarolinska Institutet · SEKarolinska University Hospital · SEStockholm University · SE

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_21013Medical Research Council MR/V023799/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesBoth radiomics and deep learning methods have shown great promise in predicting lesion malignancy in various image-based oncology studies. However, it is still unclear which method to choose for a specific clinical problem given the access to the same amount of training data. In this study, we try to compare the performance of a series of carefully selected conventional radiomics methods, end-to-end deep learning models, and deep-feature based radiomics pipelines for pulmonary nodule malignancy prediction on an open database that consists of 1297 manually delineated lung nodules.

methodsConventional radiomics analysis was conducted by extracting standard handcrafted features from target nodule images. Several end-to-end deep classifier networks, including VGG, ResNet, DenseNet, and EfficientNet were employed to identify lung nodule malignancy as well. In addition to the baseline implementations, we also investigated the importance of feature selection and class balancing, as well as separating the features learned in the nodule target region and the background/context region. By pooling the radiomics and deep features together in a hybrid feature set, we investigated the compatibility of these two sets with respect to malignancy prediction.

resultsThe best baseline conventional radiomics model, deep learning model, and deep-feature based radiomics model achieved AUROC values (mean ± standard deviations) of 0.792 ± 0.025, 0.801 ± 0.018, and 0.817 ± 0.032, respectively through 5-fold cross-validation analyses. However, after trying out several optimization techniques, such as feature selection and data balancing, as well as adding context features, the corresponding best radiomics, end-to-end deep learning, and deep-feature based models achieved AUROC values of 0.921 ± 0.010, 0.824 ± 0.021, and 0.936 ± 0.011, respectively. We achieved the best prediction accuracy from the hybrid feature set (AUROC: 0.938 ± 0.010).

conclusionThe end-to-end deep-learning model outperforms conventional radiomics out of the box without much fine-tuning. On the other hand, fine-tuning the models lead to significant improvements in the prediction performance where the conventional and deep-feature based radiomics models achieved comparable results. The hybrid radiomics method seems to be the most promising model for lung nodule malignancy prediction in this comparative study.

Indexed as

benign-malignant classificationdeep classifierlung cancer predictionlung noduleradiomics

Identifiers

PMID34976794
PMCPMC8718670
OpenAlexW4200153631

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.