ArticleScientific reports2026
Training set augmentation and biology-aware harmonization improve radiomic models for lung cancer prediction in indeterminate nodules.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
- Update of
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CT radiomics-based machine learning has potential to predict lung cancer in pulmonary nodules (PNs) earlier than standard-of-care methods. Low malignancy rates in early-development PNs and variable image acquisition hinder development of radiomic models for diagnosing these PNs. To address these challenges, we augmented training using later-development PNs and harmonized for acquisition effects. We examine early-development benign and malignant PNs (n = 106) below the sensitivity of standard-of-care diagnosis. Classifiers predicting malignancy performed near chance when trained on ComBat-harmonized radiomic features from only early-development PNs. We then augmented training with later-development benign and malignant PNs (n = 225). We evaluated whether harmonization must incorporate biology that impacts acquisition effects in added training data. To correct variability from four acquisition protocols, we compared: (1) biology-unaware harmonization, (2) harmonizing with a covariate distinguishing early-development, later-development benign, later-development malignant datasets, (3) harmonizing each dataset separately. Models trained using augmentation, but biology-unaware harmonization, failed to improve consistently. Augmented training data harmonized with a covariate (ROC-AUC 0.74 [0.69-0.79]) or separately (ROC-AUC 0.71 [0.66-0.77]) yielded higher test ROC-AUC (Delong, p ≤ 0.05) and PR-AUC (Wilcoxon, p ≤ 0.05). In a proof-of-principle methodological study, we demonstrate with a small single-center dataset that combining radiomic features from later-development benign and malignant PNs requires biology-aware harmonization.
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.