ArticleInsights into imaging2026
MRI-derived radiomics for risk stratification of tumor deposits in rectal cancer: a dual-center study.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic utility of MRI-based radiomics in stratifying the risk of tumor deposits (TD) in patients with rectal cancer (RC). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed 729 patients with RC from two institutions (January 2018-August 2024). Patients were classified into three groups according to the number of TD: no TD (TD0), 1-2 TD (TD1-2), and ≥ 3 TD (TD3+). Radiomics features were extracted from the tumor and the largest nodule within the rectal mesentery on MRI images. Predictive models were developed with the XGBoost algorithm. Model performance was evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic curve, area under the curve, confusion matrix, precision, accuracy, recall, and F1 score.
resultsThree hundred seventy-six patients were ultimately included and allocated into training, test, and validation sets. The tumor model (developed using tumor features) achieved AUCs of 0.871 (test set) and 0.848 (validation set), with corresponding accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 of 0.745/0.716, 0.764/0.688, 0.764/0.734, and 0.764/0.710, respectively. The nodule model (developed using the largest nodule) yielded AUCs of 0.839/0.804, accuracy of 0.673/0.637, precision of 0.571/0.614, recall of 0.800/0.686, and F1 of 0.667/0.648 in the test and validation sets, respectively. The fusion model, which combined tumor and nodule features, achieved enhanced performance with AUCs of 0.873/0.858, accuracy of 0.800/0.784, precision of 0.804/0.712, recall of 0.745/0.775, and F1 of 0.774/0.742, outperformed both individual models and two radiologists (accuracy 0.676/0.589).
conclusionsMRI-derived radiomics demonstrates significant potential for risk stratification of TD in RC. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The radiomics model integrating tumor features and maximal short-axis diameter of mesorectal nodules effectively predicts three distinct quantity-based categories of TD in RC, enabling preoperative risk stratification and assisting personalized treatment planning. KEY POINTS: Tumor and nodule features support effective stratification of TD. The fusion model for TD classification outperforms two radiologists. MRI-based radiomics aids TD risk stratification.
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.