ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Computed tomography radiomics identification of T1-2 and T3-4 stages of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: two-dimensional or three-dimensional?
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of spectral CT in quantitative evaluation of pathologic response to neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a pilot study.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Integration of CT radiomics and machine learning for preoperative T staging of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Quantitative analysis for identifying molecular subtypes of small cell lung cancer via two-dimensional and three-dimensional contrast-enhanced computed tomography images: a preliminary study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Radiomics applications in the modern management of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Review
- Radiomics-clinical nomogram for preoperative tumor-node-metastasis staging prediction in breast cancer patients using dynamic enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- CT radiomics to predict pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.European radiology · 2025Article
- Combining serum biomarkers and MRI radiomics to predict treatment outcome after thermal ablation in hepatocellular carcinoma.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Prediction of lymphovascular invasion in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma by computed tomography-based radiomics analysis: 2D or 3D ?Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) radiomics analysis for the T stage of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).
methods398 patients with pathologically confirmed ESCC were divided into training and testing sets. All patients underwent chest CT scans preoperatively. For each tumor, based on CT images, a 2D region of interest (ROI) was outlined on the largest cross-sectional area, and a 3D ROI was outlined layer by layer on each section of the tumor. The radiomics platform was used for feature extraction. For feature selection, stepwise logistic regression was used. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to assess the diagnostic performance of the 2D radiomics model versus the 3D radiomics model. The differences were compared using the DeLong test. The value of the clinical utility of the two radiomics models was evaluated.
results1595 radiomics features were extracted. After screening, two radiomics models were constructed. In the training set, the difference between the area under the curve (AUC) of the 2D radiomics model (AUC = 0.831) and the 3D radiomics model (AUC = 0.830) was not statistically significant (p = 0.973). In the testing set, the difference between the AUC of the 2D radiomics model (AUC = 0.807) and the 3D radiomics model (AUC = 0.797) was also not statistically significant (p = 0.748). A 2D model was equally useful as a 3D model in clinical situations.
conclusionThe performance of 2D radiomics model is comparable to that of 3D radiomics model in distinguishing between the T1-2 and T3-4 stages of ESCC. In addition, 2D radiomics model may be a more feasible option due to the shorter time required for segmenting the ROI.
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.