Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:7
|
作者
Zhang, Hao [1 ]
Lei, Hanqi [1 ]
Pang, Jun [1 ]
机构
[1] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Affiliated Hosp 7, Kidney & Urol Ctr,Dept Urol, Pelv Floor Disorders Ctr, Shenzhen, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY | 2022年 / 12卷
关键词
adrenal tumor; radiomics; machine learning; diagnostic performance; radiomics quality score; TEXTURE ANALYSIS; TUMOR HETEROGENEITY; CT; ADENOMA; PHEOCHROMOCYTOMA; INCIDENTALOMA; BENIGN; MARKER; IMAGES; TOOL;
D O I
10.3389/fonc.2022.975183
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objectives: (1) To assess the methodological quality and risk of bias of radiomics studies investigating the diagnostic performance in adrenal masses and (2) to determine the potential diagnostic value of radiomics in adrenal tumors by quantitative analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible literature. Methodological quality and risk of bias in the included studies were assessed by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) and Radiomics Quality Score (RQS). The diagnostic performance was evaluated by pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC). Spearman's correlation coefficient and subgroup analysis were used to investigate the cause of heterogeneity. Publication bias was examined using the Deeks' funnel plot. Results: Twenty-eight studies investigating the diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal tumors were identified, with a total of 3579 samples. The average RQS was 5.11 (14.2% of total) with an acceptable inter-rater agreement (ICC 0.94, 95% CI 0.93-0.95). The risk of bias was moderate according to the result of QUADAS-2. Nine studies investigating the use of CT-based radiomics in differentiating malignant from benign adrenal tumors were included in the quantitative analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, DOR and AUC with 95% confidence intervals were 0.80 (0.68-0.88), 0.83 (0.73-0.90), 19.06 (7.87-46.19) and 0.88 (0.85-0.91), respectively. There was significant heterogeneity among the included studies but no threshold effect in the meta-analysis. The result of subgroup analysis demonstrated that radiomics based on unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT possessed higher diagnostic performance, and second-order or higher-order features could enhance the diagnostic sensitivity but also increase the false positive rate. No significant difference in diagnostic ability was observed between studies with machine learning and those without. Conclusions: The methodological quality and risk of bias of studies investigating the diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal tumors should be further improved in the future. CT-based radiomics has the potential benefits in differentiating malignant from benign adrenal tumors. The heterogeneity between the included studies was a major limitation to obtaining more accurate conclusions.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ CRD 42022331999 .
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Diagnostic performance of ADC values and MRI-based radiomics analysis for detecting lymph node metastasis in patients with cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ren, Jing
    Li, Yuan
    Liu, Xin-Yu
    Zhao, Jia
    Jin, Zheng-Yu
    Xue, Hua-Dan
    He, Yong-Lan
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 156
  • [32] A systematic review and meta-analysis of CT and MRI radiomics in ovarian cancer: methodological issues and clinical utility
    Huang, Meng-Lin
    Ren, Jing
    Jin, Zheng-Yu
    Liu, Xin-Yu
    He, Yong-Lan
    Li, Yuan
    Xue, Hua-Dan
    INSIGHTS INTO IMAGING, 2023, 14 (01)
  • [33] MRI-based radiomics for prediction of biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Salimi, Mohsen
    Vadipour, Pouria
    Houshi, Shakiba
    Yazdanpanah, Fereshteh
    Seifi, Sharareh
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2025,
  • [34] Radiomics in distinguishing between lung adenocarcinoma and lung squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Shi, Lili
    Zhao, Jinli
    Wei, Zhichao
    Wu, Huiqun
    Sheng, Meihong
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2024, 14
  • [35] Radiomics in Diagnosis, Grading, and Treatment Response Assessment of Soft Tissue Sarcomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Zhu, Nana
    Meng, Xianghong
    Wang, Zhi
    Hu, Yongcheng
    Zhao, Tingting
    Fan, Hongxing
    Niu, Feige
    Han, Jun
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2024, 31 (10) : 3982 - 3992
  • [36] Diagnostic performance of MRI for HCC according to contrast agent type: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kim, Dong Wook
    Choi, Sang Hyun
    Kim, So Yeon
    Byun, Jae Ho
    Lee, Seung Soo
    Park, Seong Ho
    Kim, Kyung Won
    HEPATOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 14 (06) : 1009 - 1022
  • [37] The Diagnostic Accuracy Between Radiomics Model and Non-radiomics Model for Preoperative of Microvascular Invasion of Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Gou, Junjiu
    Li, Jingqi
    Li, Yingfeng
    Lu, Mingjie
    Wang, Chen
    Zhuo, Yi
    Dong, Xue
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2024, 31 (11) : 4419 - 4433
  • [38] Radiomics Analysis for Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review with Radiomics Quality Scoring
    Klontzas, Michail E.
    Triantafyllou, Matthaios
    Leventis, Dimitrios
    Koltsakis, Emmanouil
    Kalarakis, Georgios
    Tzortzakakis, Antonios
    Karantanas, Apostolos H.
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2023, 13 (12)
  • [39] Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Nabizadeh, Fardin
    Ramezannezhad, Elham
    Kargar, Amirhosein
    Sharafi, Amir Mohammad
    Ghaderi, Ali
    NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2023, 44 (02) : 499 - 517
  • [40] A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of MRI for Evaluation of Acute Appendicitis
    Duke, Eugene
    Kalb, Bobby
    Arif-Tiwari, Hina
    Daye, Zhongyin John
    Gilbertson-Dahdal, Dorothy
    Keim, Samuel M.
    Martin, Diego R.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2016, 206 (03) : 508 - 517