Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37079029›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2023

Current state of radiomic research in pancreatic cancer: focusing on study design and reproducibility of findings.

James Alex Malcolm, Mark Tacey, Peter Gibbs, Belinda Lee, Hyun Soo Ko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2023. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

5 authors.

James Alex MalcolmFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Mark TaceyDepartment of Biostatistics, Northern Health, Epping, VIC, Australia.
Peter GibbsFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Belinda LeeFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Hyun Soo KoDepartment of Cancer Imaging, The Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. hyun.ko@petermac.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6727-9507

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo critically appraise methodology and reproducibility of published studies on CT radiomics of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

methodsPRISMA literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Scopus databases was conducted from June to August 2022 relating to CT radiomics human research articles pertaining to PDAC diagnosis, treatment, and/ or prognosis, utilising Image Biomarker Standardisation Initiative-compliant (IBSI) radiomic software. Keyword search included [pancreas OR pancreatic] AND [radiomic OR [quantitative AND imaging] OR [texture AND analysis]]. Analysis included cohort size, CT protocol used, radiomic feature (RF) extraction, segmentation, and selection, software used, outcome correlation, and statistical methodology, with focus on reproducibility.

resultsInitial search yielded 1112 articles; however, only 12 articles met all inclusion/exclusion criteria. Cohort sizes ranged from 37 to 352 (median = 106, mean = 155.8). CT slice thickness varied among studies (4 using ≤ 1 mm, 5 using > 1 to 3 mm, 2 using > 3 to 5 mm, 1 not specifying). CT protocol varied (5 using a single portal-venous (pv)-phase, 5 using a pancreas protocol, 1 study using a non-contrast protocol). RF extraction and segmentation were heterogeneous (RF extraction: 5 using pv-phase, 2 using late arterial, 4 using multi-phase, 1 using non-contrast phase; RF selection: 3 pre-selected, 9 software-selected). 2D/3D RF segmentation was diverse (2D in 6, 3D in 4, 2D and 3D in 2 studies). Six different radiomics software were used. Research questions and cohort characteristics varied, ultimately leading to non-comparable outcome results.

conclusionThe current twelve published IBSI-compliant PDAC radiomic studies show high variability and often incomplete methodology resulting in low robustness and reproducibility. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Radiomics research requires IBSI compliance, data harmonisation, and reproducible feature extraction methods for non-invasive imaging biomarker discoveries to be valid. This will ensure a successful clinical implementation and ultimately an improvement of patient outcomes as part of precision and personalised medicine. KEY POINTS: • Current state of radiomics research in pancreatic cancer shows low software compliance to the Image Biomarker Standardisation Initiative (IBSI). • IBSI-compliant radiomics studies in pancreatic cancer are heterogeneous and not comparable, and the majority of study designs showed low reproducibility. • Improved methodology and standardisation of practice in the emerging field of radiomics has the potential of this non-invasive imaging biomarker in the management of pancreatic cancer.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalPancreatic NeoplasmsDiagnostic ImagingHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersPancreatic carcinomaPrecision medicineRadiologyReproducibility of results

Identifiers

PMID37079029
PMCPMC10511615

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.