Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40756110›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025

Multi-model radiomics and machine learning for differentiating lipid-poor adrenal adenomas from metastases using automatic segmentation.

Shengnan Yin, Ning Ding, Shaocai Wang, Mengjuan Li, Yichi Zhang, Jiacheng Shen, Haitao Hu, Yiding Ji, Long Jin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

9 authors.

Shengnan Yin *Department of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Ning Ding *Department of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Shaocai WangDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Mengjuan LiDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Yichi ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Jiacheng ShenDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Haitao HuDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Yiding JiDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Long JinDepartment of Radiology, Suzhou Ninth Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University: Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Radiomics based on automatic segmentation of CT images has emerged as a highly promising approach for differentiating adrenal adenomas from metastases in clinical practice; however, its preoperative diagnostic value has not been fully evaluated in previously developed methodologies. Objective: To fully elucidate the diagnostic value of radiomics based on automatic segmentation techniques in differentiating adrenal adenomas from metastases through a retrospective analysis of clinical and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) data. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical and imaging data of 416 patients with adrenal masses larger than 10 mm, who had clinically indicated contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) examinations at our hospital between January 2020 and June 2024. Adrenal lesions were segmented automatically using 3D Slicer, and radiomic features were extracted from the segmented arterial and venous phase images using PyRadiomics. Feature selection and dimensionality reduction were performed using mutual information (MI), minimum redundancy maximum relevance (MRMR), LASSO, and Pearson correlation analysis. Clinical and imaging features were then incorporated into an XGBoost machine learning model, and model performance was evaluated using Area Under Curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, and F1 score. SHAP analysis was used to interpret the model's predictions and identify the most influential features. Results: This study included 221 adenomas and 195 metastases. Significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of age, lesion size, and contrast washout rate (P < 0.001). After feature extraction, selection, and dimensionality reduction, 15 arterial phase features, 6 venous phase features, and 18 combined features were used for model training. The AUC values of the XGBoost model for the arterial phase, venous phase, combined arterial and venous phase data, and combined arterial, venous phase, and clinical indicators were 0.81, 0.81, 0.88, and 0.92, respectively. Five-fold cross-validation showed that the average scores of XGBoost were 0.868, 0.823, 0.897, and 0.89, respectively. SHAP summary plot for each sample under different features were used to illustrate the interpretability of the model. Conclusion: A machine learning model, combining multimodal CT radiomics and automatic segmentation technology, enables machine-based clinical features extraction, improves the differentiation between adrenal adenomas and metastases, and provides a reliable foundation for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning.

Indexed as

adrenal massescontrast-enhanced CTmachine learningradiomicsSHAP analysis

Identifiers

PMID40756110
PMCPMC12313494

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.