Barry Nathaniel, Kendrick Jake, Molin Kaylee, Li Suning, Rowshanfarzad Pejman, Hassan Ghulam M, Dowling Jason, Parizel Paul M, Hofman Michael S, Ebert Martin A
School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.
Centre for Advanced Technologies in Cancer Research (CATCR), Perth, WA, Australia.
Eur Radiol. 2025 Mar;35(3):1701-1713. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11341-y. Epub 2025 Jan 10.
Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the application of the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS).
A search was conducted from January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2023, for systematic reviews which implemented the RQS. Identification of articles prior to 2022 was via a previously published review. Quality scores of individual radiomics papers, their associated criteria scores, and these scores from all readers were extracted. Errors in the application of RQS criteria were noted and corrected. The RQS of radiomics papers were matched with the publication date, imaging modality, and country, where available.
A total of 130 systematic reviews were included, and individual quality scores 117/130 (90.0%), criteria scores 98/130 (75.4%), and multiple reader data 24/130 (18.5%) were extracted. 3258 quality scores were correlated with the radiomics study date of publication. Criteria scoring errors were discovered in 39/98 (39.8%) of articles. Overall mean RQS was 9.4 ± 6.4 (95% CI, 9.1-9.6) (26.1% ± 17.8% (25.3%-26.7%)). Quality scores were positively correlated with publication year (Pearson R = 0.32, p < 0.01) and significantly higher after publication of the RQS (year < 2018, 5.6 ± 6.1 (5.1-6.1); year ≥ 2018, 10.1 ± 6.1 (9.9-10.4); p < 0.01). Only 233/3258 (7.2%) scores were ≥ 50% of the maximum RQS. Quality scores were significantly different across imaging modalities (p < 0.01). Ten criteria were positively correlated with publication year, and one was negatively correlated.
Radiomics study adherence to the RQS is increasing with time, although a vast majority of studies are developmental and rarely provide a high level of evidence to justify the clinical translation of proposed models.
Question What level of adherence to the Radiomics Quality Score have radiomics studies achieved to date, has it increased with time, and is it sufficient? Findings A meta-analysis of 3258 quality scores extracted from 130 review articles resulted in a mean score of 9.4 ± 6.4. Quality scores were positively correlated with time. Clinical relevance Although quality scores of radiomics studies have increased with time, many studies have not demonstrated sufficient evidence for clinical translation. As new appraisal tools emerge, the current role of the Radiomics Quality Score may change.
对放射组学质量评分(RQS)的应用进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
检索2022年1月1日至2023年12月31日期间实施RQS的系统评价。2022年之前的文章通过先前发表的综述进行识别。提取各放射组学论文的质量评分、相关标准评分以及所有读者的这些评分。记录并纠正RQS标准应用中的错误。将放射组学论文的RQS与发表日期、成像方式和国家(如可用)进行匹配。
共纳入130篇系统评价,提取了个体质量评分117/130(90.0%)、标准评分98/130(75.4%)和多读者数据24/130(18.5%)。3258个质量评分与放射组学研究发表日期相关。在39/98(39.8%)的文章中发现了标准评分错误。总体平均RQS为9.4±6.4(95%CI,9.1 - 9.6)(26.1%±17.8%(25.3% - 26.7%))。质量评分与发表年份呈正相关(Pearson相关系数R = 0.32,p < 0.01),且在RQS发表后显著更高(年份<2018,5.6±6.1(5.1 - 6.1);年份≥2018,10.1±6.1(9.9 - 10.4);p < 0.01)。仅233/3258(7.2%)的评分≥最大RQS的50%。不同成像方式的质量评分存在显著差异(p < 0.01)。10项标准与发表年份呈正相关,1项呈负相关。
尽管绝大多数研究仍处于发展阶段,很少能提供高水平证据来证明所提出模型的临床转化合理性,但放射组学研究对RQS的遵循程度随时间推移在增加。
问题放射组学研究目前对放射组学质量评分的遵循程度如何,是否随时间增加,是否足够?发现对从130篇综述文章中提取的3258个质量评分进行荟萃分析,得出平均评分为9.4±6.4。质量评分与时间呈正相关。临床意义尽管放射组学研究的质量评分随时间有所提高,但许多研究尚未证明有足够的临床转化证据。随着新的评估工具出现,放射组学质量评分的当前作用可能会改变。