Suji Lee1, Kyunghwa Han1, Young Joo Suh2. 1. Department of Radiology, Center for Clinical Imaging Data Science, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Center for Clinical Imaging Data Science, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. rongzusuh@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of current radiomics research on cardiac CT using radiomics quality score (RQS) and Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) systems. METHODS: Systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE were performed to identify all potentially relevant original research articles about cardiac CT radiomics. Fifteen original research articles were selected. Two cardiac radiologists assessed the quality of the methodology adopted in those studies according to the RQS and TRIPOD guidelines. Basic adherence rates for the following six key domains were evaluated: image protocol and reproducibility, feature reduction and validation, biologic/clinical utility, performance index, high level of evidence, and open science. RESULTS: Among the 15 included articles, six (40%) were about coronary artery disease and six (40%) were about myocardial infarction. The mean RQS was 9.9 ± 7.3 (27.4% of the ideal score of 36), and the basic adherence rate was 44.6%. Fourteen (93.3%) and nine (60%) studies performed feature selection and validation, but only two (13.3%) of them performed external validation. Two studies (13.3%) were prospective, and only one study (6.7%) conducted calibration analysis and stated the potential clinical utility. None of the studies conducted phantom study and cost-effective analysis. The overall adherence rate for TRIPOD was 63%. CONCLUSION: The quality of radiomics studies in cardiac CT is currently insufficient. A higher level of evidence is required, and analysis of clinical utility and calibration of model performance need to be improved. KEY POINTS: • The quality of science of radiomics studies in cardiac CT is currently insufficient. • No study conducted a phantom study or cost-effective analysis, with further limitations being demonstrated in a high level of evidence for radiomics studies. • Analysis of clinical utility and calibration of model performance need to be improved, and a higher level of evidence is required.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of current radiomics research on cardiac CT using radiomics quality score (RQS) and Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) systems. METHODS: Systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE were performed to identify all potentially relevant original research articles about cardiac CT radiomics. Fifteen original research articles were selected. Two cardiac radiologists assessed the quality of the methodology adopted in those studies according to the RQS and TRIPOD guidelines. Basic adherence rates for the following six key domains were evaluated: image protocol and reproducibility, feature reduction and validation, biologic/clinical utility, performance index, high level of evidence, and open science. RESULTS: Among the 15 included articles, six (40%) were about coronary artery disease and six (40%) were about myocardial infarction. The mean RQS was 9.9 ± 7.3 (27.4% of the ideal score of 36), and the basic adherence rate was 44.6%. Fourteen (93.3%) and nine (60%) studies performed feature selection and validation, but only two (13.3%) of them performed external validation. Two studies (13.3%) were prospective, and only one study (6.7%) conducted calibration analysis and stated the potential clinical utility. None of the studies conducted phantom study and cost-effective analysis. The overall adherence rate for TRIPOD was 63%. CONCLUSION: The quality of radiomics studies in cardiac CT is currently insufficient. A higher level of evidence is required, and analysis of clinical utility and calibration of model performance need to be improved. KEY POINTS: • The quality of science of radiomics studies in cardiac CT is currently insufficient. • No study conducted a phantom study or cost-effective analysis, with further limitations being demonstrated in a high level of evidence for radiomics studies. • Analysis of clinical utility and calibration of model performance need to be improved, and a higher level of evidence is required.
Authors: Turkey Refaee; Zohaib Salahuddin; Anne-Noelle Frix; Chenggong Yan; Guangyao Wu; Henry C Woodruff; Hester Gietema; Paul Meunier; Renaud Louis; Julien Guiot; Philippe Lambin Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-23