Zhong Jingyu, Hu Yangfan, Xing Yue, Ge Xiang, Ding Defang, Zhang Huan, Yao Weiwu
Department of Imaging, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 1111 Xianxia Road, Shanghai, 200336, China.
Department of Radiology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197 Ruijin 2nd Road, Shanghai, 200025, China.
Insights Imaging. 2022 Aug 20;13(1):139. doi: 10.1186/s13244-022-01279-4.
Multiple tools have been applied to radiomics evaluation, while evidence rating tools for this field are still lacking. This study aims to assess the quality of pancreatitis radiomics research and test the feasibility of the evidence level rating tool.
Thirty studies were included after a systematic search of pancreatitis radiomics studies until February 28, 2022, via five databases. Twenty-four studies employed radiomics for diagnostic purposes. The mean ± standard deviation of the adherence rate was 38.3 ± 13.3%, 61.3 ± 11.9%, and 37.1 ± 27.2% for the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS), the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist, and the Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative (IBSI) guideline for preprocessing steps, respectively. The median (range) of RQS was 7.0 (- 3.0 to 18.0). The risk of bias and application concerns were mainly related to the index test according to the modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. The meta-analysis on differential diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis versus pancreatic cancer by CT and mass-forming pancreatitis versus pancreatic cancer by MRI showed diagnostic odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of, respectively, 189.63 (79.65-451.48) and 135.70 (36.17-509.13), both rated as weak evidence mainly due to the insufficient sample size.
More research on prognosis of acute pancreatitis is encouraged. The current pancreatitis radiomics studies have insufficient quality and share common scientific disadvantages. The evidence level rating is feasible and necessary for bringing the field of radiomics from preclinical research area to clinical stage.
多种工具已应用于放射组学评估,但该领域的证据评级工具仍很缺乏。本研究旨在评估胰腺炎放射组学研究的质量,并测试证据水平评级工具的可行性。
通过五个数据库对截至2022年2月28日的胰腺炎放射组学研究进行系统检索后,纳入了30项研究。24项研究将放射组学用于诊断目的。放射组学质量评分(RQS)、个体预后或诊断多变量预测模型的透明报告(TRIPOD)清单以及图像生物标志物标准化倡议(IBSI)预处理步骤指南的依从率均值±标准差分别为38.3±13.3%、61.3±11.9%和37.1±27.2%。RQS的中位数(范围)为7.0(-3.0至18.0)。根据改良的诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS-2)工具,偏倚风险和应用问题主要与索引测试有关。关于CT鉴别自身免疫性胰腺炎与胰腺癌以及MRI鉴别肿块型胰腺炎与胰腺癌的荟萃分析显示,诊断比值比(95%置信区间)分别为189.63(79.65-451.48)和135.70(36.17-509.13),两者均被评为弱证据,主要原因是样本量不足。
鼓励对急性胰腺炎的预后进行更多研究。当前的胰腺炎放射组学研究质量不足,存在共同的科学缺陷。证据水平评级对于将放射组学领域从临床前研究阶段推进到临床阶段是可行且必要的。