ArticlePloS one2022
Mitigation of noise-induced bias of PET radiomic features.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning models to predict 6-month mortality risk in home-based hospice patients with advanced cancer.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- Multicentric study on the reproducibility and robustness of PET-based radiomics features with a realistic activity painting phantom.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOne major challenge in PET radiomics is its sensitivity to noise. Low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) affects not only the precision but also the accuracy of quantitative metrics extracted from the images resulting in noise-induced bias. This phantom study aims to identify the radiomic features that are robust to noise in terms of precision and accuracy and to explore some methods that might help to correct noise-induced bias.
methodsA phantom containing three 18F-FDG filled 3D printed inserts, reflecting heterogeneous tracer uptake and realistic tumor shapes, was used in the study. The three different phantom inserts were filled and scanned with three different tumor-to-background ratios, simulating a total of nine different tumors. From the 40-minute list-mode data, ten frames each for 5 s, 10 s, 30 s, and 120 s frame duration were reconstructed to generate images with different noise levels. Under these noise conditions, the precision and accuracy of the radiomic features were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and similarity distance metric (SDM) respectively. Based on the ICC and SDM values, the radiomic features were categorized into four groups: poor, moderate, good, and excellent precision and accuracy. A "difference image" created by subtracting two statistically equivalent replicate images was used to develop a model to correct the noise-induced bias. Several regression methods (e.g., linear, exponential, sigmoid, and power-law) were tested. The best fitting model was chosen based on Akaike information criteria.
resultsSeveral radiomic features derived from low SNR images have high repeatability, with 68% of radiomic features having ICC ≥ 0.9 for images with a frame duration of 5 s. However, most features show a systematic bias that correlates with the increase in noise level. Out of 143 features with noise-induced bias, the SDM values were improved based on a regression model (53 features to excellent and 67 to good) indicating that the noise-induced bias of these features can be, at least partially, corrected.
conclusionTo have a predictive value, radiomic features should reflect tumor characteristics and be minimally affected by noise. The present study has shown that it is possible to correct for noise-induced bias, at least in a subset of the features, using a regression model based on the local image noise estimates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.