ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Different MRI-based radiomics models for differentiating misdiagnosed or ambiguous pleomorphic adenoma and Warthin tumor of the parotid gland: a multicenter study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Evaluation of Systemic Inflammatory Markers in Predicting Malignancy in Parotid Gland Tumors.The Laryngoscope · 2026Observational
- An integrated clinical and imaging-based machine learning model to determine the preoperative nature of primary operable parotid tumors.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Article
- Interpretable Deep Learning Radiomics for Differentiating Pleomorphic Adenoma and Warthin Tumor.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of MRI-based radiomics models in distinguishing between Warthin tumors (WT) and misdiagnosed or ambiguous pleomorphic adenoma (PA). Methods: Data of patients with PA and WT from two centers were collected. MR images were used to extract radiomic features. The optimal radiomics model was found by running nine machine learning algorithms after feature reduction and selection. To create a clinical model, univariate logistic regression (LR) analysis and multivariate LR were used. The independent clinical predictors and radiomics were combined to create a nomogram. Two integrated models were constructed by the ensemble and stacking algorithms respectively based on the clinical model and the optimal radiomics model. The models' performance was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC). Results: There were 149 patients included in all. Gender, age, and smoking of patients were independent clinical predictors. With the greatest average AUC (0.896) and accuracy (0.839) in validation groups, the LR model was the optimal radiomics model. In the average validation group, the radiomics model based on LR did not have a higher AUC (0.795) than the clinical model (AUC = 0.909). The nomogram (AUC = 0.953) outperformed the radiomics model in terms of discrimination performance. The nomogram in the average validation group had a highest AUC than the stacking model (0.914) or ensemble model (0.798). Conclusion: Misdiagnosed or ambiguous PA and WT can be non-invasively distinguished using MRI-based radiomics models. The nomogram exhibited excellent and stable diagnostic performance. In daily work, it is necessary to combine with clinical parameters for distinguishing between PA and WT.
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.