Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39164314›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A reference framework for standardization and harmonization of CT radiomics features on cadaveric sample.

Riccardo Levi, Maximiliano Mollura, Giovanni Savini, Federico Garoli, Massimiliano Battaglia, Angela Ammirabile, Luca A Cappellini, Simona Superbi, Marco Grimaldi, Riccardo Barbieri and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Riccardo LeviDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini, Pieve Emanuele, 20072, Milan, Italy.
Maximiliano MolluraDepartment of Electronic, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Giovanni SaviniNeuroradiology Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, 20089, Milan, Italy.
Federico GaroliDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini, Pieve Emanuele, 20072, Milan, Italy.
Massimiliano BattagliaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini, Pieve Emanuele, 20072, Milan, Italy.
Angela AmmirabileDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini, Pieve Emanuele, 20072, Milan, Italy.
Luca A CappelliniDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini, Pieve Emanuele, 20072, Milan, Italy.
Simona SuperbiNeuroradiology Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, 20089, Milan, Italy.
Marco GrimaldiNeuroradiology Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, 20089, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo BarbieriDepartment of Electronic, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Letterio S PolitiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini, Pieve Emanuele, 20072, Milan, Italy. letterio.politi@hunimed.eu.

Funding

Ministero della Salute RF-2021-12374134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiomics features (RFs) serve as quantitative metrics to characterize shape, density/intensity, and texture patterns in radiological images. Despite their promise, RFs exhibit reproducibility challenges across acquisition settings, thus limiting implementation into clinical practice. In this investigation, we evaluate the effects of different CT scanners and CT acquisition protocols (KV, mA, field-of-view, and reconstruction kernel settings) on RFs extracted from lumbar vertebrae of a cadaveric trunk. Employing univariate and multivariate Generalized Linear Models (GLM), we evaluated the impact of each acquisition parameter on RFs. Our findings indicate that variations in mA had negligible effects on RFs, while alterations in kV resulted in exponential changes in several RFs, notably First Order (94.4%), GLCM (87.5%), and NGTDM (100%). Moreover, we demonstrated that a tailored GLM model was superior to the ComBat algorithm in harmonizing CT images. GLM achieved R2 > 0.90 in 21 RFs (19.6%), contrasting ComBat's mean R2 above 0.90 in only 1 RF (0.9%). This pioneering study unveils the effects of CT acquisition parameters on bone RFs in cadaveric specimens, highlighting significant variations across parameters and scanner datasets. The proposed GLM model presents a robust solution for mitigating these differences, potentially advancing harmonization efforts in Radiomics-based studies across diverse CT protocols and vendors.

Indexed as

RadiomicsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAlgorithmsCadaverHumansLumbar VertebraeReference StandardsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID39164314
PMCPMC11336160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.