Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40745233›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2025

The value of a radiomics model in predicting ovarian malignancy: a retrospective multi-center comparison with O-RADS and radiologists.

Junjie Jin, Xijia Deng, Ling Long, Meiling Liu, Meimei Cao, Hao Gong, Huan Liu, Xiaosong Lan, Lili Liu, Jiuquan Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Junjie Jin *Department of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China.
Xijia Deng *Department of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China.
Ling LongDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China.
Meiling LiuDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China.
Meimei CaoDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China.
Hao GongSchool of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Huan LiuGE Healthcare, Medical Affairs, Shanghai, 201203, People's Republic of China.
Xiaosong LanDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China.
Lili Liu *Department of Radiology, Chongqing General Hospital, Chongqing University, Shapingba, People's Republic of China. liulili007@163.com.
Jiuquan Zhang *Department of Radiology, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, Chongqing University, Chongqing, 400030, People's Republic of China. zhangjq_radiol@foxmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0239-6988

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing Municipality CSTB2024NSCQ-MSX0496
6 · The paper itself

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

MRIOvarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data SystemOvarian massesRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID40745233
PMCPMC12314133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.