ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Interpretable multiphasic CT-based radiomic analysis for preoperatively differentiating benign and malignant solid renal tumors: a multicenter study.
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 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.
- Review
- Preoperative prediction of Ki-67 expression and prognosis in breast cancer based on contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT: a two-centre study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026Article
- CT-Based Radiomics in the Characterization of Solid Renal Tumors: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Trends in artificial intelligence and machine learning for renal cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo develop and compare machine learning models based on triphasic contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for distinguishing between benign and malignant renal tumors. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn total, 427 patients were enrolled from two medical centers: Center 1 (serving as the training set) and Center 2 (serving as the external validation set). First, 1781 radiomic features were individually extracted from corticomedullary phase (CP), nephrographic phase (NP), and excretory phase (EP) CECT images, after which 10 features were selected by the minimum redundancy maximum relevance method. Second, random forest (RF) models were constructed from single-phase features (CP, NP, and EP) as well as from the combination of features from all three phases (TP). Third, the RF models were assessed in the training and external validation sets. Finally, the internal prediction mechanisms of the models were explained by the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) approach.
resultsA total of 266 patients with renal tumors from Center 1 and 161 patients from Center 2 were included. In the training set, the AUCs of the RF models constructed from the CP, NP, EP, and TP features were 0.886, 0.912, 0.930, and 0.944, respectively. In the external validation set, the models achieved AUCs of 0.860, 0.821, 0.921, and 0.908, respectively. The "original_shape_Flatness" feature played the most important role in the prediction outcome for the RF model based on EP features according to the SHAP method.
conclusionsThe four RF models efficiently differentiated benign from malignant solid renal tumors, with the EP feature-based RF model displaying the best performance.
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.