An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation
Abstract Objective To conduct an overview of meta-analyses of radiomics studies assessing their study quality and evidence level. Methods A systematical search was updated via peer-reviewed electronic databases, preprint servers, and systematic review protocol registers until 15 November 2022. Syste...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2023-06-01
|
| Series: | Insights into Imaging |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01437-2 |
| _version_ | 1797784548172365824 |
|---|---|
| author | Jingyu Zhong Junjie Lu Guangcheng Zhang Shiqi Mao Haoda Chen Qian Yin Yangfan Hu Yue Xing Defang Ding Xiang Ge Huan Zhang Weiwu Yao |
| author_facet | Jingyu Zhong Junjie Lu Guangcheng Zhang Shiqi Mao Haoda Chen Qian Yin Yangfan Hu Yue Xing Defang Ding Xiang Ge Huan Zhang Weiwu Yao |
| author_sort | Jingyu Zhong |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Objective To conduct an overview of meta-analyses of radiomics studies assessing their study quality and evidence level. Methods A systematical search was updated via peer-reviewed electronic databases, preprint servers, and systematic review protocol registers until 15 November 2022. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis of primary radiomics studies were included. Their reporting transparency, methodological quality, and risk of bias were assessed by PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 checklist, AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, version 2) tool, and ROBIS (Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews) tool, respectively. The evidence level supporting the radiomics for clinical use was rated. Results We identified 44 systematic reviews with meta-analyses on radiomics research. The mean ± standard deviation of PRISMA adherence rate was 65 ± 9%. The AMSTAR-2 tool rated 5 and 39 systematic reviews as low and critically low confidence, respectively. The ROBIS assessment resulted low, unclear and high risk in 5, 11, and 28 systematic reviews, respectively. We reperformed 53 meta-analyses in 38 included systematic reviews. There were 3, 7, and 43 meta-analyses rated as convincing, highly suggestive, and weak levels of evidence, respectively. The convincing level of evidence was rated in (1) T2-FLAIR radiomics for IDH-mutant vs IDH-wide type differentiation in low-grade glioma, (2) CT radiomics for COVID-19 vs other viral pneumonia differentiation, and (3) MRI radiomics for high-grade glioma vs brain metastasis differentiation. Conclusions The systematic reviews on radiomics were with suboptimal quality. A limited number of radiomics approaches were supported by convincing level of evidence. Clinical relevance statement The evidence supporting the clinical application of radiomics are insufficient, calling for researches translating radiomics from an academic tool to a practicable adjunct towards clinical deployment. Graphical Abstract |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T00:41:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3b3d145fb21a42898e731c94b6e79127 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1869-4101 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T00:41:28Z |
| publishDate | 2023-06-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Insights into Imaging |
| spelling | doaj.art-3b3d145fb21a42898e731c94b6e791272023-07-09T11:15:47ZengSpringerOpenInsights into Imaging1869-41012023-06-0114111210.1186/s13244-023-01437-2An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translationJingyu Zhong0Junjie Lu1Guangcheng Zhang2Shiqi Mao3Haoda Chen4Qian Yin5Yangfan Hu6Yue Xing7Defang Ding8Xiang Ge9Huan Zhang10Weiwu Yao11Department of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthDepartment of Orthopedics, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Medical Oncology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of MedicineDepartment of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Pathology, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Radiology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineDepartment of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineAbstract Objective To conduct an overview of meta-analyses of radiomics studies assessing their study quality and evidence level. Methods A systematical search was updated via peer-reviewed electronic databases, preprint servers, and systematic review protocol registers until 15 November 2022. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis of primary radiomics studies were included. Their reporting transparency, methodological quality, and risk of bias were assessed by PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 checklist, AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, version 2) tool, and ROBIS (Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews) tool, respectively. The evidence level supporting the radiomics for clinical use was rated. Results We identified 44 systematic reviews with meta-analyses on radiomics research. The mean ± standard deviation of PRISMA adherence rate was 65 ± 9%. The AMSTAR-2 tool rated 5 and 39 systematic reviews as low and critically low confidence, respectively. The ROBIS assessment resulted low, unclear and high risk in 5, 11, and 28 systematic reviews, respectively. We reperformed 53 meta-analyses in 38 included systematic reviews. There were 3, 7, and 43 meta-analyses rated as convincing, highly suggestive, and weak levels of evidence, respectively. The convincing level of evidence was rated in (1) T2-FLAIR radiomics for IDH-mutant vs IDH-wide type differentiation in low-grade glioma, (2) CT radiomics for COVID-19 vs other viral pneumonia differentiation, and (3) MRI radiomics for high-grade glioma vs brain metastasis differentiation. Conclusions The systematic reviews on radiomics were with suboptimal quality. A limited number of radiomics approaches were supported by convincing level of evidence. Clinical relevance statement The evidence supporting the clinical application of radiomics are insufficient, calling for researches translating radiomics from an academic tool to a practicable adjunct towards clinical deployment. Graphical Abstracthttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01437-2RadiomicsQuality improvementSystematic reviewMeta-analysis |
| spellingShingle | Jingyu Zhong Junjie Lu Guangcheng Zhang Shiqi Mao Haoda Chen Qian Yin Yangfan Hu Yue Xing Defang Ding Xiang Ge Huan Zhang Weiwu Yao An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation Insights into Imaging Radiomics Quality improvement Systematic review Meta-analysis |
| title | An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation |
| title_full | An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation |
| title_fullStr | An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation |
| title_full_unstemmed | An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation |
| title_short | An overview of meta-analyses on radiomics: more evidence is needed to support clinical translation |
| title_sort | overview of meta analyses on radiomics more evidence is needed to support clinical translation |
| topic | Radiomics Quality improvement Systematic review Meta-analysis |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01437-2 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jingyuzhong anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT junjielu anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT guangchengzhang anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT shiqimao anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT haodachen anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT qianyin anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT yangfanhu anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT yuexing anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT defangding anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT xiangge anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT huanzhang anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT weiwuyao anoverviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT jingyuzhong overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT junjielu overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT guangchengzhang overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT shiqimao overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT haodachen overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT qianyin overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT yangfanhu overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT yuexing overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT defangding overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT xiangge overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT huanzhang overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation AT weiwuyao overviewofmetaanalysesonradiomicsmoreevidenceisneededtosupportclinicaltranslation |