Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40471268›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2025

CT-based radiogenomic analysis to predict high-risk colon cancer (ATTRACT): a multicentric trial.

Damiano Caruso, Michela Polici, Marta Zerunian, Andrea Monterubbiano, Mariarita Tarallo, Emanuela Pilozzi, Laura Belloni, Giorgia Scafetta, Daniela Valanzuolo, Dominga Pugliese and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06108310 (ATTRACT - ArTificial inTelligence-based RAdiogenomics in Colon Tumors), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT06108310 unknown statusnot on this map

ATTRACT - ArTificial inTelligence-based RAdiogenomics in Colon Tumors

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Roma La SapienzaRan2021 to 2025Enrolled500ConditionsColon Cancer Stage II, Colon Cancer Stage III
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Damiano CarusoDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Michela PoliciDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Marta ZerunianDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Andrea MonterubbianoComputer Science Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Mariarita TaralloDepartment of Surgery "Pietro Valdoni", Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Emanuela PilozziDepartment Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Unit of Anatomic Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy.
Laura BelloniDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Giorgia ScafettaTranslational Oncology Research Unit, IRCCs Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Daniela ValanzuoloDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Dominga PuglieseDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Domenico De SantisDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Andrea VecchioneDepartment Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Unit of Anatomic Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy.
Paolo MercantiniDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Elsa IannicelliDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Enrico FioriDepartment of Surgery "Pietro Valdoni", Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Andrea LaghiDepartment of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome-Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy. andrea.laghi@uniroma1.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3091-7819

Funding

Fondazione AIRC per la ricerca sul cancro ETS IG 2020- ID 24974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveClinical staging on CT has several biases, and a radiogenomics approach could be proposed. The study aimed to test the performance of a radiogenomics approach in identifying high-risk colon cancer. MATERIAL AND

methodsATTRACT is a multicentric trial, registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06108310). Three hundred non-metastatic colon cancer patients were retrospectively enrolled and divided into two groups, high-risk and no-risk, according to the pathological staging. Radiological evaluations were performed by two abdominal radiologists. For 151 patients, we achieved genomics. The baseline CT scans were used to evaluate the radiological assessment and to perform 3D cancer segmentation. One expert radiologist used open-source software to perform the volumetric cancer segmentations on baseline CT scans in the portal phase (3DSlicer v4.10.2). Implementing the classical LASSO with a machine-learning library method was used to select the optimal features to build Model 1 (clinical-radiological plus radiomic feature, 300 patients) and Model 2 (Model 1 plus genomics, 151 patients). The performance of clinical-radiological interpretation was assessed regarding the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. The average performance of Models 1 and 2 was also calculated.

resultsIn total, 262/300 were classified as high-risk and 38/300 as no-risk. Clinical-radiological interpretation by the two radiologists achieved an AUC of 0.58-0.82 (95% CI: 0.52-0.63 and 0.76-0.85, p < 0.001, respectively), sensitivity: 67.9-93.8%, specificity: 47.4-68.4%, and accuracy: 65.3-90.7%, respectively. Model 1 yielded AUC: 0.74 (95% CI: 0.61-0.88, p < 0.005), sensitivity: 86%, specificity: 48%, and accuracy: 81%. Model2 reached AUC: 0.84, (95% CI: 0.68-0.99, p < 0.005), sensitivity: 88%, specificity: 63%, and accuracy: 84%.

conclusionThe radiogenomics model outperformed radiological interpretation in identifying high-risk colon cancer. KEY POINTS: Question Can this radiogenomic model identify high-risk stages II and III colon cancer in a preoperative clinical setting? Findings This radiogenomics model outperformed both the radiomics and radiological interpretations, reducing the risk of improper staging and incorrect treatment options. Clinical relevance The radiogenomics model was demonstrated to be superior to radiological interpretation and radiomics in identifying high-risk colon cancer, and could therefore be promising in stratifying high-risk and low-risk patients.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsGenomicsImaging GenomicsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityColon cancerCTGenomicsPredictive modelRadiomics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.