SynthesisEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2025
PET radiomics for histologic subtype classification of non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep integration of clinical metadata with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- A narrative review of imaging intratumor heterogeneity in non-small cell lung cancer: current advances.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
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
Abstract
purposeTo systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis of PET radiomics for histologic subtype classification in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
methodsPubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched in English on human subjects for studies on distinguishing adenocarcinoma (ADC) from squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) using PET radiomics published from inception until November 2024. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool and the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) were utilized to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was pooled to estimate predictive performance. An overall effect size was estimated using a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated by the I
resultsTwelve studies were included in the analysis, yielding a pooled AUC of 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.94). Despite this promising result, the studies showed limitations in both study design and methodological quality, as evidenced by a median RQS of 11/36. A significant degree of heterogeneity was observed among the studies, with an I
conclusionsThis meta-analysis highlights the potential utility of PET radiomics in distinguishing ADC from SCC. However, the observed high heterogeneity indicates substantial methodological variability across the included studies. Future research should focus on standardization, transparency, and multicenter collaborations to improve the reliability and clinical applicability of PET radiomics for histologic subtype classification in NSCLC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39794511What 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.