ArticleOral oncology2025
Computed tomography radiomics-based cross-sectional detection of mandibular osteoradionecrosis in head and neck cancer survivors.
Article in Oral oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiomic analysis of pathologically confirmed mandibular osteoradionecrosis to identify cases with associated recurrence: a multicentric retrospective study.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- From Imaging to Impact: A Multi-Disciplinary T32 Program Framework and Initial Insights for Training in Image-Guided Cancer Therapy [Advance Publication].Advances in cancer education and quality improvement · 2025Article
- Image-based mandibular and maxillary parcellation and annotation using computed tomography (IMPACT): a deep learning-based clinical tool for orodental dose estimation and osteoradionecrosis assessment.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Early Imaging Identification of Osteoradionecrosis and Classification Using the Novel ClinRad System: Results from A Retrospective Observational Cohort.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to identify radiomic features from contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) scans that differentiate osteoradionecrosis (ORN) from normal mandibular bone in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients treated with radiotherapy (RT). MATERIALS AND
methodsCECT images from 150 patients with confirmed ORN diagnosis (2008-2018) at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) were analyzed (80 % train, 20 % test). Radiomic features were extracted using PyRadiomics from manually segmented ORN regions and automated contralateral healthy mandible regions. Correlation analysis (r > 0.95) reduced features for model training. A random Forest (RF) classifier with Recursive Feature Elimination identified discriminative features. Explainability was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis on the 20 most important features identified by the trained RF classifier.
resultsOf the 1316 radiomic features extracted, 810 features were excluded for high collinearity. From a set of 506 pre-selected radiomic features, 67 were optimal for RF classification, yielding 88% accuracy and a ROC AUC of 0.96. The model well calibrated (Log Loss 0.296, ECE 0.125) and achieved an accuracy of 88% and a ROC AUC of 0.96. The SHAP analysis revealed that higher values of Wavelet-LLH First order Mean and Median were associated with ORN of the jaw (ORNJ). Conversely, higher Exponential GLDM Dependence Entropy and lower Square First-order Kurtosis were more characteristic of normal mandibular tissue.
conclusionThis study successfully developed a CECT-based radiomics model for differentiating ORNJ from healthy mandibular tissue in HNC patients after RT. Future work will focus on detecting subclinical ORNJ regions to guide earlier interventions.
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.