Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38472955›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Evaluation of Pulmonary Nodules by Radiologists vs. Radiomics in Stand-Alone and Complementary CT and MRI.

Eric Tietz, Gustav Müller-Franzes, Markus Zimmermann, Christiane Katharina Kuhl, Sebastian Keil, Sven Nebelung, Daniel Truhn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Eric TietzDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1133-6111
Gustav Müller-FranzesDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7413-2570
Markus ZimmermannDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.
Christiane Katharina KuhlDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.
Sebastian KeilDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.
Sven NebelungDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.
Daniel TruhnDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52072 Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increased attention has been given to MRI in radiation-free screening for malignant nodules in recent years. Our objective was to compare the performance of human readers and radiomic feature analysis based on stand-alone and complementary CT and MRI imaging in classifying pulmonary nodules. This single-center study comprises patients with CT findings of pulmonary nodules who underwent additional lung MRI and whose nodules were classified as benign/malignant by resection. For radiomic features analysis, 2D segmentation was performed for each lung nodule on axial CT, T2-weighted (T2w), and diffusion (DWI) images. The 105 extracted features were reduced by iterative backward selection. The performance of radiomics and human readers was compared by calculating accuracy with Clopper-Pearson confidence intervals. Fifty patients (mean age 63 +/- 10 years) with 66 pulmonary nodules (40 malignant) were evaluated. ACC values for radiomic features analysis vs. radiologists based on CT alone (0.68; 95%CI: 0.56, 0.79 vs. 0.59; 95%CI: 0.46, 0.71), T2w alone (0.65; 95%CI: 0.52, 0.77 vs. 0.68; 95%CI: 0.54, 0.78), DWI alone (0.61; 95%CI:0.48, 0.72 vs. 0.73; 95%CI: 0.60, 0.83), combined T2w/DWI (0.73; 95%CI: 0.60, 0.83 vs. 0.70; 95%CI: 0.57, 0.80), and combined CT/T2w/DWI (0.83; 95%CI: 0.72, 0.91 vs. 0.64; 95%CI: 0.51, 0.75) were calculated. This study is the first to show that by combining quantitative image information from CT, T2w, and DWI datasets, pulmonary nodule assessment through radiomics analysis is superior to using one modality alone, even exceeding human readers' performance.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceCTMRIpulmonary noduleradiomics

Identifiers

PMID38472955
PMCPMC10930396

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.