MRI based radiomics in nasopharyngeal cancer: Systematic review and perspectives using radiomic quality score (RQS) assessment.
Computer-assisted
Head and neck cancer
Image processing
Journal impact factor
Magnetic resonance imaging
Nasopharyngeal neoplasm
Systematic review
Journal
European journal of radiology
ISSN: 1872-7727
Titre abrégé: Eur J Radiol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8106411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
23
03
2021
revised:
23
04
2021
accepted:
27
04
2021
pubmed:
8
5
2021
medline:
3
6
2021
entrez:
7
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
MRI based radiomics has the potential to better define tumor biology compared to qualitative MRI assessment and support decisions in patients affected by nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the methodological quality of studies using MRI- radiomics for nasopharyngeal cancer patient evaluation. A systematic search was performed in PUBMED, WEB OF SCIENCE and SCOPUS using "MRI, magnetic resonance imaging, radiomic, texture analysis, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, nasopharyngeal cancer" in all possible combinations. The methodological quality of study included ( = 24) was evaluated according to the RQS (Radiomic quality score). Subgroup, for journal type (imaging/clinical) and biomarker (prognostic/predictive), and correlation, between RQS and journal Impact Factor, analyses were performed. Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman's correlation were performed. P value < .05 were defined as statistically significant. Overall, no studies reported a phantom study or a test re-test for assessing stability in image, biological correlation or open science data. Only 8% of them included external validation. Almost half of articles (45 %) performed multivariable analysis with non-radiomics features. Only 1 study was prospective (4%). The mean RQS was 7.5 ± 5.4. No significant differences were detected between articles published in clinical/imaging journal and between studies with a predictive or prognostic biomarker. No significant correlation was found between total RQS and Impact Factor of the year of publication (p always > 0.05). Radiomic articles in nasopharyngeal cancer are mostly of low methodological quality. The greatest limitations are the lack of external validation, biological correlates, prospective design and open science.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
MRI based radiomics has the potential to better define tumor biology compared to qualitative MRI assessment and support decisions in patients affected by nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the methodological quality of studies using MRI- radiomics for nasopharyngeal cancer patient evaluation.
METHODS
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in PUBMED, WEB OF SCIENCE and SCOPUS using "MRI, magnetic resonance imaging, radiomic, texture analysis, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, nasopharyngeal cancer" in all possible combinations. The methodological quality of study included ( = 24) was evaluated according to the RQS (Radiomic quality score). Subgroup, for journal type (imaging/clinical) and biomarker (prognostic/predictive), and correlation, between RQS and journal Impact Factor, analyses were performed. Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman's correlation were performed. P value < .05 were defined as statistically significant.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overall, no studies reported a phantom study or a test re-test for assessing stability in image, biological correlation or open science data. Only 8% of them included external validation. Almost half of articles (45 %) performed multivariable analysis with non-radiomics features. Only 1 study was prospective (4%). The mean RQS was 7.5 ± 5.4. No significant differences were detected between articles published in clinical/imaging journal and between studies with a predictive or prognostic biomarker. No significant correlation was found between total RQS and Impact Factor of the year of publication (p always > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Radiomic articles in nasopharyngeal cancer are mostly of low methodological quality. The greatest limitations are the lack of external validation, biological correlates, prospective design and open science.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33962253
pii: S0720-048X(21)00225-4
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109744
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
109744Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.