ArticlePloS one2024
The reproducibility and predictivity of radiomic features extracted from dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography of hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy: predictive role of whole-tumor iodine density histogram features and resection margin distance.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Article
- Dynamic Vascular Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity on Multiphase CT for Preoperative Prediction of Microvascular Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
- A survival prediction model for leptomeningeal metastasis patients with non-small cell lung cancer based on deep learning.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- [Effect of AI-assisted compressed sensing acceleration on MRI radiomic feature extraction and staging model performance for nasopharyngeal carcinoma].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess the reproducibility of radiomic features (RFs) extracted from dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (DCE-CT) scans of patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with regards to inter-observer variability and acquisition timing after contrast injection. The predictive ability of reproducible RFs for differentiating between the degrees of HCC differentiation is also investigated.
methodsWe analyzed a set of DCE-CT scans of 39 patients diagnosed with HCC. Two radiologists independently segmented the scans, and RFs were extracted from each sequence of the DCE-CT scans. The same lesion was segmented across the DCE-CT sequences of each patient's scan. From each lesion, 127 commonly used RFs were extracted. The reproducibility of RFs was assessed with regard to (i) inter-observer variability, by evaluating the reproducibility of RFs between the two radiologists; and (ii) timing of acquisition following contrast injection (inter- and intra-imaging phase). The reproducibility of RFs was assessed using the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), with a cut-off value of 0.90. Reproducible RFs were used for building XGBoost classification models for the differentiation of HCC differentiation.
resultsInter-observer analyses across the different contrast-enhancement phases showed that the number of reproducible RFs was 29 (22.8%), 52 (40.9%), and 36 (28.3%) for the non-contrast enhanced, late arterial, and portal venous phases, respectively. Intra- and inter-sequence analyses revealed that the number of reproducible RFs ranged between 1 (0.8%) and 47 (37%), inversely related with time interval between the sequences. XGBoost algorithms built using reproducible RFs in each phase were found to be high predictive ability of the degree of HCC tumor differentiation.
conclusionsThe reproducibility of many RFs was significantly impacted by inter-observer variability, and a larger number of RFs were impacted by the difference in the time of acquisition after contrast injection. Our findings highlight the need for quality assessment to ensure that scans are analyzed in the same physiologic imaging phase in quantitative imaging studies, or that phase-wide reproducible RFs are selected. Overall, the study emphasizes the importance of reproducibility and quality control when using RFs as biomarkers for clinical applications.
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.