ReviewCancers2026
Radiomics for Detection and Differentiation of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cancers, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is an aggressive primary liver malignancy with limited survival, largely due to delayed diagnosis, recurrence and limited effective therapeutic options. Radiomics- and artificial intelligence (AI)-based imaging models have emerged as promising tools to improve noninvasive detection and differentiation of ICC. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of radiomics-based AI models for ICC.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed from inception through 2025 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies assessing radiomics- or AI-based models derived from CT, MRI, PET, or ultrasound for differentiation of ICC from other hepatic lesions were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were estimated using a bivariate random-effects model. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) and QUADAS-2 tools.
resultsTwenty retrospective studies comprising 8746 participants were included. Across pooled validation and test datasets, radiomics-based AI models demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.69-0.84) and specificity of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.78-0.94) for differentiating ICC from non-ICC hepatic lesions. The pooled PLR was 6.81 (95% CI, 3.51-13.2), and the pooled NLR was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.09-0.61). CT-based models showed higher diagnostic performance compared with MRI and ultrasound. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses identified imaging modality, contrast phase, segmentation strategy, and validation approach as contributors to interstudy heterogeneity. The overall methodological quality demonstrated a mean Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) of 14.0 (range 11-24), corresponding to approximately 39% of the maximum achievable score. External validation cohorts were incorporated in 60% of the studies, although adherence to standardized feature reproducibility frameworks varied.
conclusionsRadiomics-based AI models demonstrate clinically meaningful diagnostic accuracy for noninvasive differentiation of ICC and may complement conventional imaging in preoperative evaluation. Prospective, multicenter studies with standardized imaging protocols and rigorous external validation are required before routine clinical adoption.
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.