Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35715462›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Analysis of MRI and CT-based radiomics features for personalized treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer and external validation of published radiomics models.

Iram Shahzadi, Alex Zwanenburg, Annika Lattermann, Annett Linge, Christian Baldus, Jan C Peeken, Stephanie E Combs, Markus Diefenhardt, Claus Rödel, Simon Kirste and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Artificial intelligence for response prediction and personalisation in radiation oncology.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Role of Radiomics in Rectal Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2023
    Review
  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

15 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Iram ShahzadiOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Alex ZwanenburgOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Annika LattermannOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Annett LingeOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Christian BaldusDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Jan C PeekenGerman Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Munich, Germany and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Stephanie E CombsGerman Cancer Consortium (DKTK) partner site Munich, Germany and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Markus DiefenhardtDepartment of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Claus RödelDepartment of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Simon KirsteDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Anca-Ligia GrosuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Michael BaumannOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Mechthild KrauseOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Esther G C TroostOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Steffen LöckOncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany. steffen.loeck@oncoray.de.
German Cancer Research Center · DEOncoRay · DEUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DEHeidelberg University · DETechnical University of Munich · DETU Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiomics analyses commonly apply imaging features of different complexity for the prediction of the endpoint of interest. However, the prognostic value of each feature class is generally unclear. Furthermore, many radiomics models lack independent external validation that is decisive for their clinical application. Therefore, in this manuscript we present two complementary studies. In our modelling study, we developed and validated different radiomics signatures for outcome prediction after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) based on computed tomography (CT) and T2-weighted (T2w) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging datasets of 4 independent institutions (training: 122, validation 68 patients). We compared different feature classes extracted from the gross tumour volume for the prognosis of tumour response and freedom from distant metastases (FFDM): morphological and first order (MFO) features, second order texture (SOT) features, and Laplacian of Gaussian (LoG) transformed intensity features. Analyses were performed for CT and MRI separately and combined. Model performance was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) and the concordance index (CI) for tumour response and FFDM, respectively. Overall, intensity features of LoG transformed CT and MR imaging combined with clinical T stage (cT) showed the best performance for tumour response prediction, while SOT features showed good performance for FFDM in independent validation (AUC = 0.70, CI = 0.69). In our external validation study, we aimed to validate previously published radiomics signatures on our multicentre cohort. We identified relevant publications on comparable patient datasets through a literature search and applied the reported radiomics models to our dataset. Only one of the identified studies could be validated, indicating an overall lack of reproducibility and the need of further standardization of radiomics before clinical application.

Indexed as

Rectal NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeoadjuvant TherapyPrecision MedicineReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID35715462
PMCPMC9205935
OpenAlexW4283076596

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.