ArticleResearch in diagnostic and interventional imaging2022
Grading of soft tissues sarcomas using radiomics models: Choice of imaging methods and comparison with conventional visual analysis.
Article in Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis on diagnostic failure of US-guided core needle biopsy for soft tissue tumors.Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To determine which combination of imaging modalities/contrast, radiomics models, and how many features provides the best diagnostic performance for the differentiation between low- and high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS) using a radiomics approach. Methods: MRI and CT from 39 patients with a histologically confirmed STS were prospectively analyzed. Images were evaluated both quantitatively by radiomics models and qualitatively by visual evaluation (used as reference) for grading (low-grade vs high-grade). In radiomics analysis, 120 radiomic features were extracted and contributed into three models: least absolute shrinkage and selection operator with logistic regression(LASSO-LR), recursive feature elimination and cross-validation (RFECV-SVC) and analysis of variance with SVC (ANOVA-SVC). Those were applied to different combinations of imaging modalities acquisition, with and without contrast medium administration, as well as selected number of features. Results: Fat-saturated T2w (FS-T2w) MR images using RFECV-SVC radiomic models involving five features yielded the best results with mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 92% ± 10%, 78% ± 30%, and 89% ± 12%, respectively. The performance of radiomics was better than that of conventional analysis (67% accuracy) for STS grading. Combination of multiple contrast or imaging modalities did not increase the diagnostic performance. Conclusion: FS-T2w MR images alone with a five-feature radiomics analysis usingh REFCV-SVC model may be able to provide sufficient diagnositic performance compared to conventional visual evaluation with multiple MRI contrast and CT imaging.
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.