Jacob M Murray1,2, Georgios Kaissis3, Rickmer Braren3, Jens Kleesiek4,5. 1. AG Computational Radiology, Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 2. Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, München, Deutschland. 4. AG Computational Radiology, Department of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. j.kleesiek@dkfz-heidelberg.de. 5. German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Deutschland. j.kleesiek@dkfz-heidelberg.de.
Abstract
CLINICAL ISSUE: The reproducible and exhaustive extraction of information from radiological images is a central task in the practice of radiology. Dynamic developments in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are introducing new methods for this task. Radiomics is one such method and offers new opportunities and challenges for the future of radiology. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: Radiomics describes the quantitative evaluation, interpretation, and clinical assessment of imaging markers in radiological data. Components of a radiomics analysis are data acquisition, data preprocessing, data management, segmentation of regions of interest, computation and selection of imaging markers, as well as the development of a radiomics model used for diagnosis and prognosis. This article explains these components and aims at providing an introduction to the field of radiomics while highlighting existing limitations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article is based on a selective literature search with the PubMed search engine. ASSESSMENT: Even though radiomics applications have yet to arrive in routine clinical practice, the quantification of radiological data in terms of radiomics is underway and will increase in the future. This holds the potential for lasting change in the discipline of radiology. Through the successful extraction and interpretation of all the information encoded in radiological images the next step in the direction of a more personalized, future-oriented form of medicine can be taken.
CLINICAL ISSUE: The reproducible and exhaustive extraction of information from radiological images is a central task in the practice of radiology. Dynamic developments in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are introducing new methods for this task. Radiomics is one such method and offers new opportunities and challenges for the future of radiology. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: Radiomics describes the quantitative evaluation, interpretation, and clinical assessment of imaging markers in radiological data. Components of a radiomics analysis are data acquisition, data preprocessing, data management, segmentation of regions of interest, computation and selection of imaging markers, as well as the development of a radiomics model used for diagnosis and prognosis. This article explains these components and aims at providing an introduction to the field of radiomics while highlighting existing limitations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article is based on a selective literature search with the PubMed search engine. ASSESSMENT: Even though radiomics applications have yet to arrive in routine clinical practice, the quantification of radiological data in terms of radiomics is underway and will increase in the future. This holds the potential for lasting change in the discipline of radiology. Through the successful extraction and interpretation of all the information encoded in radiological images the next step in the direction of a more personalized, future-oriented form of medicine can be taken.
Authors: Christian Nicolaj Andreassen; Line Meinertz Hybel Schack; Louise Vagner Laursen; Jan Alsner Journal: Cancer Lett Date: 2016-01-28 Impact factor: 8.679
Authors: Philippe Lambin; Emmanuel Rios-Velazquez; Ralph Leijenaar; Sara Carvalho; Ruud G P M van Stiphout; Patrick Granton; Catharina M L Zegers; Robert Gillies; Ronald Boellard; André Dekker; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2012-01-16 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Eran Segal; Claude B Sirlin; Clara Ooi; Adam S Adler; Jeremy Gollub; Xin Chen; Bryan K Chan; George R Matcuk; Christopher T Barry; Howard Y Chang; Michael D Kuo Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2007-05-21 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: Ahmed Hosny; Chintan Parmar; Thibaud P Coroller; Patrick Grossmann; Roman Zeleznik; Avnish Kumar; Johan Bussink; Robert J Gillies; Raymond H Mak; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2018-11-30 Impact factor: 11.069