ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
A radiomics-based machine learning model for the preoperative differentiation of lung adenocarcinoma subtypes.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The preoperative differentiation of lung adenocarcinoma subtypes is critical for implementing personalized treatment but is difficult to accomplish with conventional imaging. This study aimed to develop an interpretable multimodal model integrating clinical, peritumoral, radiomic, and deep learning features to improve diagnostic accuracy. Methods: A total of 3,038 patients from four hospitals were divided into training (n=1,822), test (n=608), and validation (n=608) sets. Two radiologists manually segmented two-dimensional tumor regions on computed tomography using ITK-SNAP software. After Pearson correlation analysis and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, the radiomic score and deep learning score were generated. Clinical features were selected via univariate analysis, the Boruta algorithm, and recursive feature elimination (RFE). Individual logistic models were built and fused with the optimal combination selected via support vector machine-synthetic minority oversampling technique and extreme gradient boosting. Performance was evaluated in terms of the Obuchowski index, accuracy, F1-score, calibration, and decision curves, while interpretability was assessed via Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) and individual conditional expectation (ICE). Results: The fused model achieved Obuchowski indices of 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84-0.87], 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.83), and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76-0.81) in the training, test, and validation sets, respectively outperforming the single-modality models. The F1-scores for the lepidic, acinar/papillary, and solid/micropapillary subtypes, respectively, were 0.77, 0.61, and 0.63 in the training set; 0.72, 0.57, and 0.59 in the test set; and 0.74, 0.54, and 0.52 in the validation set. Calibration and decision curve analysis confirmed the robustness and clinical utility of the model. SHAP analysis identified ResNet-101 feature as the best predictor, followed by peritumoral radiomic score, and lobulation. ICE plots revealed the linear and monotonic relationships between key features and predicted probabilities across subtypes. Conclusions: The radiomics model developed in this study facilitates the accurate and interpretable preoperative classification of lung adenocarcinoma subtypes. Fusion of clinical, peritumoral, and deep learning features enhances diagnostic performance and supports clinical decision-making.
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.