ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2022
Prediction of lipomatous soft tissue malignancy on MRI: comparison between machine learning applied to radiomics and deep learning.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radiomics-based approaches outperform visual analysis for differentiating lipoma from atypical lipomatous tumors: a review.Skeletal radiology · 2023Pooled it
- Bayesian additive regression trees for machine learning to classify benign vs atypical lipomatous tumors on MRI.Radiology advances · 2025Article
- Deep learning on CT scans to predict checkpoint inhibitor treatment outcomes in advanced melanoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Integration of pre-treatment computational radiomics, deep radiomics, and transcriptomics enhances soft-tissue sarcoma patient prognosis.NPJ precision oncology · 2024Article
- CT and MRI radiomics of bone and soft-tissue sarcomas: an updated systematic review of reproducibility and validation strategies.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications for the imaging of bone and soft tissue tumors.Frontiers in radiology · 2024Review
- The role of parametric feature maps to correct different volume of interest sizes: an in vivo liver MRI study.European radiology experimental · 2023Article
- MRI radiomics-based machine learning for classification of deep-seated lipoma and atypical lipomatous tumor of the extremities.La Radiologia medica · 2023Article
- Tumor-to-bone distance and radiomic features on MRI distinguish intramuscular lipomas from well-differentiated liposarcomas.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Robustness of Radiomic Features: Two-Dimensional versus Three-Dimensional MRI-Based Feature Reproducibility in Lipomatous Soft-Tissue Tumors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMalignancy of lipomatous soft-tissue tumours diagnosis is suspected on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and requires a biopsy. The aim of this study is to compare the performances of MRI radiomic machine learning (ML) analysis with deep learning (DL) to predict malignancy in patients with lipomas oratypical lipomatous tumours.
methodsCohort include 145 patients affected by lipomatous soft tissue tumours with histology and fat-suppressed gadolinium contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI pulse sequence. Images were collected between 2010 and 2019 over 78 centres with non-uniform protocols (three different magnetic field strengths (1.0, 1.5 and 3.0 T) on 16 MR systems commercialised by four vendors (General Electric, Siemens, Philips, Toshiba)). Two approaches have been compared: (i) ML from radiomic features with and without batch correction; and (ii) DL from images. Performances were assessed using 10 cross-validation folds from a test set and next in external validation data.
resultsThe best DL model was obtained using ResNet50 (resulting into an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 ± 0.11 (95% CI 0.65-1). For ML/radiomics, performances reached AUCs equal to 0.83 ± 0.12 (95% CI 0.59-1) and 0.99 ± 0.02 (95% CI 0.95-1) on test cohort using gradient boosting without and with batch effect correction, respectively. On the external cohort, the AUC of the gradient boosting model was equal to 0.80 and for an optimised decision threshold sensitivity and specificity were equal to 100% and 32% respectively.
conclusionsIn this context of limited observations, batch-effect corrected ML/radiomics approaches outperformed DL-based models.
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.