ArticlePolish journal of radiology2025
Machine learning-based classification of multiple sclerosis lesion activity using multi-sequence MRI radiomics: a complete analysis of T1, T2, FLAIR, DWI, and SWI features.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Gadolinium-Sparing Detection of Active Multiple Sclerosis Lesions: A Structured Narrative Review.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- Response to "On patient-level splitting, contrast-free claims and unsupported comparators inPolish journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Automatic assessment of lung involvement in systemic sclerosis using deep learning.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- On patient-level splitting, contrast-free claims and unsupported comparators in "Machine learning-based classification of multiple sclerosis lesion activity using multi-sequence MRI radiomics".Polish journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Assessing AI-augmented training for multiple sclerosis classification in a basal ganglia radiomics model.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Differentiating active from non-active multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions is critical for disease management but often relies on gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), raising concerns about retention risks and costs. This study introduces a contrast-free, multi-sequence MRI approach using radiomics and machine learning to classify MS lesion activity. Material and methods: A total of 187 lesions from 31 MS patients (mean age 42.5 ± 11.3 years; 64.5% female) at Amin Hospital (November 2024 - February 2025) were retrospectively analysed using a 1.5 T MRI scanner. Five sequences - T1-weighted (T1W), T2-weighted (T2W), fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) - were processed to extract 8905 radiomic features, refined to 127 via correlation and recursive feature elimination. XGBoost classified lesions as active or non-active, validated on an internal test set ( Results: The XGBoost model achieved an AUC-ROC of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.92), sensitivity of 0.85, and specificity of 0.83, outperforming other classifiers (SVM AUC 0.84). FLAIR (35.4%) and T2W (28.3%) dominated feature contributions, with SWI (12.6%) enhancing accuracy (AUC dropped to 0.84 without SWI). Noise simulation (Gaussian σ = 0.1) confirmed robustness (AUC = 0.86). Conclusions: This integration of SWI with conventional sequences in a unified radiomic model offers a promising contrast-free alternative for MS lesion classification, achieving promising accuracy comparable to radiologist performance on an internal test set (
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.