Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38436611›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

Evaluation of the performance of both machine learning models using PET and CT radiomics for predicting recurrence following lung stereotactic body radiation therapy: A single-institutional study.

Hikaru Nemoto, Masahide Saito, Yoko Satoh, Takafumi Komiyama, Kan Marino, Shinichi Aoki, Hidekazu Suzuki, Naoki Sano, Hotaka Nonaka, Hiroaki Watanabe and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Hikaru NemotoDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Imaging, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6540-2906
Masahide SaitoDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8636-4045
Yoko SatohImaging Center, Fujita Medical Innovation Center Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Takafumi KomiyamaDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
Kan MarinoDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
Shinichi AokiDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
Hidekazu SuzukiDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
Naoki SanoDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
Hotaka NonakaDepartment of Radiology, Fuji City General Hospital, Fuji, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hiroaki WatanabeDepartment of Radiology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, Kofu, Yamanashi, Japan.
Satoshi FunayamaDepartment of Radiology, Hamamatsu University school of medicine, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hiroshi OnishiDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Chuo, Yamanashi, Japan.
University of Yamanashi Hospital · JPFujieda Municipal General Hospital · JPHamamatsu University School of Medicine · JPYamanashi Prefectural Central Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePredicting recurrence following stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for non-small cell lung cancer provides important information for the feasibility of the individualized radiotherapy and allows to select the appropriate treatment strategy based on the risk of recurrence. In this study, we evaluated the performance of both machine learning models using positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) radiomic features for predicting recurrence after SBRT.

methodsPlanning CT and PET images of 82 non-small cell lung cancer patients who performed SBRT at our hospital were used. First, tumors were delineated on each CT and PET of each patient, and 111 unique radiomic features were extracted, respectively. Next, the 10 features were selected using three different feature selection algorithms, respectively. Recurrence prediction models based on the selected features and four different machine learning algorithms were developed, respectively. Finally, we compared the predictive performance of each model for each recurrence pattern using the mean area under the curve (AUC) calculated following the 0.632+ bootstrap method.

resultsThe highest performance for local recurrence, regional lymph node metastasis, and distant metastasis were observed in models using Support vector machine with PET features (mean AUC = 0.646), Naive Bayes with PET features (mean AUC = 0.611), and Support vector machine with CT features (mean AUC = 0.645), respectively.

conclusionsWe comprehensively evaluated the performance of prediction model developed for recurrence following SBRT. The model in this study would provide information to predict the recurrence pattern and assist in making treatment strategies.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsMachine LearningRadiosurgeryRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPrognosislung cancermachine learningPET imagingradiomicsSBRT

Identifiers

PMID38436611
PMCPMC11244675
OpenAlexW4392369430

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.