ArticleInsights into imaging2025
The value of a radiomics model in predicting ovarian malignancy: a retrospective multi-center comparison with O-RADS and radiologists.
Article in Insights into 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.
- Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in ovarian cancer: transforming detection, treatment, and prevention.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Review
- MRI perfusion in evaluating ovarian masses: diagnostic performance of wash out rate.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo develop an MRI-based radiomics model for ovarian masses categorization and to compare the model performance to Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and radiologists' assessments. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective multicenter study included 497 patients (249 benign, 248 malignant) allocated to training, internal, and external validation sets (293/124/80 masses, respectively). Radiomics features were extracted from preoperative MRI. Features were selected using minimum redundancy, maximum relevance, and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithm. Diagnostic performance of the radiomics model, O-RADS, and independent assessments by junior and senior radiologists was evaluated via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared using DeLong's test.
resultsIn external validation, the radiomics model (AUC = 0.939) outperformed O-RADS (AUC = 0.862; p = 0.047) and the junior radiologist (AUC = 0.802; p = 0.003) and was similar to the senior radiologist (AUC = 0.886; p = 0.231). Subgroup analysis of O-RADS score 4 showed the model (AUC = 0.879) outperformed both radiologists (junior: p = 0.001; senior: p = 0.005). For solid, cystic-solids, and cystic masses, the AUCs of the model were 0.921, 0.975, and 0.848, respectively.
conclusionsThe performance of the radiomics model to categorize ovarian masses was superior to O-RADS and junior radiologists and similar to senior radiologists. As a complementary tool to O-RADS, it allows for refined risk stratification for ovarian masses with an O-RADS score of 4 and different morphological characteristics, providing clinicians with quantitative decision support to improve preoperative diagnosis and guide treatment planning. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Radiomics model provides improved risk stratification and supports precise clinical decision-making for ovarian masses with an O-RADS score of 4 and solid, cystic-solid ovarian masses, thereby improving the management of patients with ovarian masses. KEY POINTS: MRI-based radiomics allows for the characterization of ovarian masses with high accuracy. Radiomics helps differentiate between benign and malignant ovarian masses with an O-RADS score of 4. For solid, cystic-solid, and cystic masses, the radiomics model exhibited higher or similar performance to that of the O-RADS and radiologists.
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.