Cargando…

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

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,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Hao, Lei, Hanqi, Pang, Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36119492
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.975183
_version_ 1784790513270915072
author Zhang, Hao
Lei, Hanqi
Pang, Jun
author_facet Zhang, Hao
Lei, Hanqi
Pang, Jun
author_sort Zhang, Hao
collection PubMed
description 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 REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ CRD 42022331999 .
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9478189
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94781892022-09-17 Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis Zhang, Hao Lei, Hanqi Pang, Jun Front Oncol Oncology 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 REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ CRD 42022331999 . Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9478189/ /pubmed/36119492 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.975183 Text en Copyright © 2022 Zhang, Lei and Pang https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Zhang, Hao
Lei, Hanqi
Pang, Jun
Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort diagnostic performance of radiomics in adrenal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36119492
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.975183
work_keys_str_mv AT zhanghao diagnosticperformanceofradiomicsinadrenalmassesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT leihanqi diagnosticperformanceofradiomicsinadrenalmassesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pangjun diagnosticperformanceofradiomicsinadrenalmassesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis