Russo Luca, Bottazzi Silvia, Kocak Burak, Zormpas-Petridis Konstantinos, Gui Benedetta, Stanzione Arnaldo, Imbriaco Massimo, Sala Evis, Cuocolo Renato, Ponsiglione Andrea
Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche ed Ematologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences, Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital, Basaksehir, Istanbul, Turkey.
Eur Radiol. 2025 Jan;35(1):202-214. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-10947-6. Epub 2024 Jul 16.
To assess the methodological quality of radiomics-based models in endometrial cancer using the radiomics quality score (RQS) and METhodological radiomICs score (METRICS).
We systematically reviewed studies published by October 30th, 2023. Inclusion criteria were original radiomics studies on endometrial cancer using CT, MRI, PET, or ultrasound. Articles underwent a quality assessment by novice and expert radiologists using RQS and METRICS. The inter-rater reliability for RQS and METRICS among radiologists with varying expertise was determined. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess whether scores varied according to study topic, imaging technique, publication year, and journal quartile.
Sixty-eight studies were analysed, with a median RQS of 11 (IQR, 9-14) and METRICS score of 67.6% (IQR, 58.8-76.0); two different articles reached maximum RQS of 19 and METRICS of 90.7%, respectively. Most studies utilised MRI (82.3%) and machine learning methods (88.2%). Characterisation and recurrence risk stratification were the most explored outcomes, featured in 35.3% and 19.1% of articles, respectively. High inter-rater reliability was observed for both RQS (ICC: 0.897; 95% CI: 0.821, 0.946) and METRICS (ICC: 0.959; 95% CI: 0.928, 0.979). Methodological limitations such as lack of external validation suggest areas for improvement. At subgroup analyses, no statistically significant difference was noted.
Whilst using RQS, the quality of endometrial cancer radiomics research was apparently unsatisfactory, METRICS depicts a good overall quality. Our study highlights the need for strict compliance with quality metrics. Adhering to these quality measures can increase the consistency of radiomics towards clinical application in the pre-operative management of endometrial cancer.
Both the RQS and METRICS can function as instrumental tools for identifying different methodological deficiencies in endometrial cancer radiomics research. However, METRICS also reflected a focus on the practical applicability and clarity of documentation.
The topic of radiomics currently lacks standardisation, limiting clinical implementation. METRICS scores were generally higher than the RQS, reflecting differences in the development process and methodological content. A positive trend in METRICS score may suggest growing attention to methodological aspects in radiomics research.
使用影像组学质量评分(RQS)和影像组学方法学评分(METRICS)评估基于影像组学的子宫内膜癌模型的方法学质量。
我们系统回顾了截至2023年10月30日发表的研究。纳入标准为使用CT、MRI、PET或超声对子宫内膜癌进行的原始影像组学研究。文章由新手和专家放射科医生使用RQS和METRICS进行质量评估。确定了不同专业水平的放射科医生之间RQS和METRICS的评分者间信度。进行亚组分析以评估评分是否因研究主题、成像技术、发表年份和期刊四分位数而有所不同。
分析了68项研究,RQS中位数为11(四分位间距,9 - 14),METRICS评分为67.6%(四分位间距,58.8 - 76.0);两篇不同的文章分别达到了RQS的最大值19和METRICS的最大值90.7%。大多数研究使用MRI(82.3%)和机器学习方法(88.2%)。特征化和复发风险分层是研究最多的结果,分别在35.3%和19.1%的文章中有所体现。RQS(组内相关系数:0.897;95%置信区间:0.821,0.946)和METRICS(组内相关系数:0.959;95%置信区间:0.928,0.979)均显示出较高的评分者间信度。方法学局限性如缺乏外部验证提示了改进的方向。在亚组分析中,未发现统计学上的显著差异。
虽然使用RQS时,子宫内膜癌影像组学研究的质量明显不尽人意,但METRICS显示出总体质量良好。我们的研究强调了严格遵守质量指标的必要性。遵循这些质量措施可以提高影像组学在子宫内膜癌术前管理中临床应用的一致性。
RQS和METRICS都可作为识别子宫内膜癌影像组学研究中不同方法学缺陷的工具。然而,METRICS还反映了对实际适用性和文献记录清晰度的关注。
影像组学主题目前缺乏标准化,限制了临床应用。METRICS评分普遍高于RQS,反映了开发过程和方法学内容的差异。METRICS评分的积极趋势可能表明影像组学研究对方法学方面的关注日益增加。