ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2024
Multi-institutional validation of a radiomics signature for identification of postoperative progression of soft tissue sarcoma.
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- DKC1: a robust prognostic factor and potential therapeutic target in multiple myeloma.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Radiomics of soft tissue sarcoma metastases to assess prognostic factors related to intrapatient intertumor heterogeneity.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo develop a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based radiomics signature for evaluating the risk of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) disease progression.
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 335 patients with STS (training, validation, and The Cancer Imaging Archive sets, n = 168, n = 123, and n = 44, respectively) who underwent surgical resection. Regions of interest were manually delineated using two MRI sequences. Among 12 machine learning-predicted signatures, the best signature was selected, and its prediction score was inputted into Cox regression analysis to build the radiomics signature. A nomogram was created by combining the radiomics signature with a clinical model constructed using MRI and clinical features. Progression-free survival was analyzed in all patients. We assessed performance and clinical utility of the models with reference to the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve, area under the curve, concordance index, integrated Brier score, decision curve analysis.
resultsFor the combined features subset, the minimum redundancy maximum relevance-least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression algorithm + decision tree classifier had the best prediction performance. The radiomics signature based on the optimal machine learning-predicted signature, and built using Cox regression analysis, had greater prognostic capability and lower error than the nomogram and clinical model (concordance index, 0.758 and 0.812; area under the curve, 0.724 and 0.757; integrated Brier score, 0.080 and 0.143, in the validation and The Cancer Imaging Archive sets, respectively). The optimal cutoff was - 0.03 and cumulative risk rates were calculated. DATA
conclusionTo assess the risk of STS progression, the radiomics signature may have better prognostic power than a nomogram/clinical model.
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.