Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36636424›Full record

ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2022

Impact of image filtering and assessment of volume-confounding effects on CT radiomic features and derived survival models in non-small cell lung cancer.

Stefania Volpe, Lars Johannes Isaksson, Mattia Zaffaroni, Matteo Pepa, Sara Raimondi, Francesca Botta, Giuliana Lo Presti, Maria Giulia Vincini, Cristiano Rampinelli, Marta Cremonesi and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Stable or not? unraveling the reliability of radiomic features in 4d-computed tomography in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Insights into radiomics: a comprehensive review for beginners.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Awaiting the support of artificial intelligence in lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Stefania Volpe *Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Lars Johannes Isaksson *Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Mattia ZaffaroniDivision of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Matteo PepaDivision of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Sara RaimondiDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Francesca BottaMedical Physics Unit, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Giuliana Lo PrestiDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Maria Giulia VinciniDivision of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Cristiano RampinelliDepartment of Radiology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Marta CremonesiRadiation Research Unit, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Filippo de MarinisDivision of Thoracic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Lorenzo SpaggiariDepartment of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Sara GandiniDepartment of Experimental Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Matthias GuckenbergerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Roberto OrecchiaScientific Direction, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-FossaDivision of Radiation Oncology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: No evidence supports the choice of specific imaging filtering methodologies in radiomics. As the volume of the primary tumor is a well-recognized prognosticator, our purpose is to assess how filtering may impact the feature/volume dependency in computed tomography (CT) images of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and if such impact translates into differences in the performance of survival modeling. The role of lesion volume in model performances was also considered and discussed. Methods: Four-hundred seventeen CT images NSCLC patients were retrieved from the NSCLC-Radiomics public repository. Pre-processing and features extraction were implemented using Pyradiomics v3.0.1. Features showing high correlation with volume across original and filtered images were excluded. Cox proportional hazards (PH) with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regularization and CatBoost models were built with and without volume, and their concordance (C-) indices were compared using Wilcoxon signed-ranked test. The Mann Whitney U test was used to assess model performances after stratification into two groups based on low- and high-volume lesions. Results: Radiomic models significantly outperformed models built on only clinical variables and volume. However, the exclusion/inclusion of volume did not generally alter the performances of radiomic models. Overall, performances were not substantially affected by the choice of either imaging filter (overall C-index 0.539-0.590 for Cox PH and 0.589-0.612 for CatBoost). The separation of patients with high-volume lesions resulted in significantly better performances in 2/10 and 7/10 cases for Cox PH and CatBoost models, respectively. Both low- and high-volume models performed significantly better with the inclusion of radiomic features (P<0.0001), but the improvement was largest in the high-volume group (+10.2% against +8.7% improvement for CatBoost models and +10.0% against +5.4% in Cox PH models). Conclusions: Radiomic features complement well-known prognostic factors such as volume, but their volume-dependency is high and should be managed with vigilance. The informative content of radiomic features may be diminished in small lesion volumes, which could limit the applicability of radiomics in early-stage NSCLC, where tumors tend to be small. Our results also suggest an advantage of CatBoost models over the Cox PH models.

Indexed as

non-small cell lung cancerpredictive modelpreprocessingRadiomicsvolume-dependency

Identifiers

PMID36636424
PMCPMC9830263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.