ArticlePloS one2023
Enhanced and unenhanced: Radiomics models for discriminating between benign and malignant cystic renal masses on CT images: A multi-center study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiomics analysis of biplanar ultrasound images can discriminate non-mass breast carcinoma from mastitis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Tabular prior-data fitted network in real-world CT radiomics: benignQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Intratumoral and peritumoral radiomics using multi-phase contrast-enhanced CT for diagnosis of renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMachine learning algorithms used to classify cystic renal masses (CRMs) nave not been applied to unenhanced CT images, and their diagnostic accuracy had not been compared against radiologists.
methodThis retrospective study aimed to develop radiomics models that discriminate between benign and malignant CRMs in a triple phase computed tomography (CT) protocol and compare the diagnostic accuracy of the radiomics approach with experienced radiologists. Predictive models were established using a training set and validation set of unenhanced and enhanced (arterial phase [AP] and venous phase [VP]) CT images of benign and malignant CRMs. The diagnostic capabilities of the models and experienced radiologists were compared using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves.
resultsOn unenhanced, AP and VP CT images in the validation set, the AUC, specificity, sensitivity and accuracy for discriminating between benign and malignant CRMs were 90.0 (95%CI: 81-98%), 90.0%, 90.5% and 90.2%; 93.0% (95%CI: 86-99%), 86.7%, 95.2% and 88.3%; and 95.0% (95%CI: 90%-100%), 93.3%, 90.5% and 92.1%, respectively, for the radiomics models. Diagnostic accuracy of the radiomics models differed significantly on unenhanced images in the training set vs. each radiologist (p = 0.001 and 0.003) but not in the validation set (p = 0.230 and 0.590); differed significantly on AP images in the validation set vs. each radiologist (p = 0.007 and 0.007) but not in the training set (p = 0.663 and 0.663); and there were no differences on VP images in the training or validation sets vs. each radiologist (training set: p = 0.453 and 0.051, validation set: p = 0.236 and 0.786).
conclusionsRadiomics models may have clinical utility for discriminating between benign and malignant CRMs on unenhanced and enhanced CT images. The performance of the radiomics model on unenhanced CT images was similar to experienced radiologists, implying it has potential as a screening and diagnostic tool for CRMs.
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.