SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2026
Radiomics for Prediction of Microsatellite Instability Status in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicrosatellite instability (MSI) is a key biomarker for immunotherapy in gastric cancer (GC), but preoperative non-invasive prediction remains challenging. Radiomics is promising; however, a systematic evaluation of its diagnostic performance with explicit consideration of overfitting and model comparison is lacking.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to March 25, 2026, for studies on radiomics for preoperative MSI prediction in GC. A bivariate random-effects model pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Subgroup analyses were performed by model type, data source, validation type, and algorithm.
resultsThirteen studies (2,447 patients) were included. In validation sets (17 data points), the pooled AUC was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.79-0.85), sensitivity 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.84), and specificity 0.72 (95% CI: 0.67-0.76). Performance was higher in training sets (AUC 0.88). Combined models (radiomics plus clinical features) achieved higher specificity than radiomics models (0.75 vs. 0.68) in validation sets. Externally and internally validated models had comparable AUC (0.82 vs. 0.83). Machine learning did not outperform logistic regression.
conclusionradiomics demonstrates moderate diagnostic accuracy for preoperative MSI prediction in GC. Combined models improve specificity, aiding patient selection. Differences between training and validation performance underscore the need for rigorous external validation. Prospective, multicenter studies are warranted. REGISTRATION: This research was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was prospectively registered with the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD420251148467. The protocol is available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251148467 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
42599597What 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.