Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38867143›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical imaging2024

Radiomics diagnostic performance for predicting lymph node metastasis in esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dong Ma, Teli Zhou, Jing Chen, Jun Chen

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dong MaThe Fifth Affiliated Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510900, China.
Teli ZhouGuangzhou Shiyuan Clinics Co., Ltd, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510530, China.
Jing ChenThe Fifth Affiliated Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510900, China.
Jun ChenDingxi People's Hospital, Dingxi, Gansu, 743000, China. YHM6526@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEsophageal cancer, a global health concern, impacts predominantly men, particularly in Eastern Asia. Lymph node metastasis (LNM) significantly influences prognosis, and current imaging methods exhibit limitations in accurate detection. The integration of radiomics, an artificial intelligence (AI) driven approach in medical imaging, offers a transformative potential. This meta-analysis evaluates existing evidence on the accuracy of radiomics models for predicting LNM in esophageal cancer.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, searching Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for English-language studies up to November 16, 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on preoperatively diagnosed esophageal cancer patients with radiomics predicting LNM before treatment. Exclusion criteria were applied, including non-English studies and those lacking sufficient data or separate validation cohorts. Data extraction encompassed study characteristics and radiomics technical details. Quality assessment employed modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) tools. Statistical analysis involved random-effects models for pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC). Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using Deek's test and funnel plots. Analysis was performed using Stata version 17.0 and meta-DiSc.

resultsOut of 426 initially identified citations, nine studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 719 patients. These retrospective studies utilized CT, PET, and MRI imaging modalities, predominantly conducted in China. Two studies employed deep learning-based radiomics. Quality assessment revealed acceptable QUADAS-2 scores. RQS scores ranged from 9 to 14, averaging 12.78. The diagnostic meta-analysis yielded a pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of 0.72, 0.76, and 0.74, respectively, representing fair diagnostic performance. Meta-regression identified the use of combined models as a significant contributor to heterogeneity (p-value = 0.05). Other factors, such as sample size (> 75) and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) usage for feature extraction, showed potential influence but lacked statistical significance (0.05 < p-value < 0.10). Publication bias was not statistically significant.

conclusionRadiomics shows potential for predicting LNM in esophageal cancer, with a moderate diagnostic performance. Standardized approaches, ongoing research, and prospective validation studies are crucial for realizing its clinical applicability.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsLymphatic MetastasisArtificial IntelligenceHumansRadiomicsSensitivity and SpecificityArtificial intelligenceCT-scanDeep learninEsophageal cancerMachine learningRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID38867143
PMCPMC11170881

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.