A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features
Purpose: Although quantitative image biomarkers (radiomics) show promising value for cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment assessment, these biomarkers still lack reproducibility. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the progress in radiomics reproducibility and repeatability in the re...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/7555f1f9a7b74a5bb49c2ff4bb27b386 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:7555f1f9a7b74a5bb49c2ff4bb27b386 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:7555f1f9a7b74a5bb49c2ff4bb27b3862021-11-10T04:29:31ZA systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features2405-631610.1016/j.phro.2021.10.007https://doaj.org/article/7555f1f9a7b74a5bb49c2ff4bb27b3862021-10-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631621000646https://doaj.org/toc/2405-6316Purpose: Although quantitative image biomarkers (radiomics) show promising value for cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment assessment, these biomarkers still lack reproducibility. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the progress in radiomics reproducibility and repeatability in the recent years. Methods and materials: Four hundred fifty-one abstracts were retrieved according to the original PubMed search pattern with the publication dates ranging from 2017/05/01 to 2020/12/01. Each abstract including the keywords was independently screened by four observers. Forty-two full-text articles were selected for further analysis. Patient population data, radiomic feature classes, feature extraction software, image preprocessing, and reproducibility results were extracted from each article. To support the community with a standardized reporting strategy, we propose a specific reporting checklist to evaluate the feasibility to reproduce each study. Results: Many studies continue to under-report essential reproducibility information: all but one clinical and all but two phantom studies missed to report at least one important item reporting image acquisition. The studies included in this review indicate that all radiomic features are sensitive to image acquisition, reconstruction, tumor segmentation, and interpolation. However, the amount of sensitivity is feature dependent, for instance, textural features were, in general, less robust than statistical features. Conclusions: Radiomics repeatability, reproducibility, and reporting quality can substantially be improved regarding feature extraction software and settings, image preprocessing and acquisition, cutoff values for stable feature selection. Our proposed radiomics reporting checklist can serve to simplify and improve the reporting and, eventually, guarantee the possibility to fully replicate and validate radiomic studies.Elisabeth PfaehlerIvan ZhovannikLise WeiRonald BoellaardAndre DekkerRené MonshouwerIssam El NaqaJan BussinkRobert GilliesLeonard WeeAlberto TraversoElsevierarticleRadiomicsRepeatabilityReproducibilityReviewMedical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicineR895-920Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogensRC254-282ENPhysics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology, Vol 20, Iss , Pp 69-75 (2021) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
Radiomics Repeatability Reproducibility Review Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine R895-920 Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282 |
| spellingShingle |
Radiomics Repeatability Reproducibility Review Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine R895-920 Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282 Elisabeth Pfaehler Ivan Zhovannik Lise Wei Ronald Boellaard Andre Dekker René Monshouwer Issam El Naqa Jan Bussink Robert Gillies Leonard Wee Alberto Traverso A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| description |
Purpose: Although quantitative image biomarkers (radiomics) show promising value for cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment assessment, these biomarkers still lack reproducibility. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess the progress in radiomics reproducibility and repeatability in the recent years. Methods and materials: Four hundred fifty-one abstracts were retrieved according to the original PubMed search pattern with the publication dates ranging from 2017/05/01 to 2020/12/01. Each abstract including the keywords was independently screened by four observers. Forty-two full-text articles were selected for further analysis. Patient population data, radiomic feature classes, feature extraction software, image preprocessing, and reproducibility results were extracted from each article. To support the community with a standardized reporting strategy, we propose a specific reporting checklist to evaluate the feasibility to reproduce each study. Results: Many studies continue to under-report essential reproducibility information: all but one clinical and all but two phantom studies missed to report at least one important item reporting image acquisition. The studies included in this review indicate that all radiomic features are sensitive to image acquisition, reconstruction, tumor segmentation, and interpolation. However, the amount of sensitivity is feature dependent, for instance, textural features were, in general, less robust than statistical features. Conclusions: Radiomics repeatability, reproducibility, and reporting quality can substantially be improved regarding feature extraction software and settings, image preprocessing and acquisition, cutoff values for stable feature selection. Our proposed radiomics reporting checklist can serve to simplify and improve the reporting and, eventually, guarantee the possibility to fully replicate and validate radiomic studies. |
| format |
article |
| author |
Elisabeth Pfaehler Ivan Zhovannik Lise Wei Ronald Boellaard Andre Dekker René Monshouwer Issam El Naqa Jan Bussink Robert Gillies Leonard Wee Alberto Traverso |
| author_facet |
Elisabeth Pfaehler Ivan Zhovannik Lise Wei Ronald Boellaard Andre Dekker René Monshouwer Issam El Naqa Jan Bussink Robert Gillies Leonard Wee Alberto Traverso |
| author_sort |
Elisabeth Pfaehler |
| title |
A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| title_short |
A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| title_full |
A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| title_fullStr |
A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| title_full_unstemmed |
A systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| title_sort |
systematic review and quality of reporting checklist for repeatability and reproducibility of radiomic features |
| publisher |
Elsevier |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/7555f1f9a7b74a5bb49c2ff4bb27b386 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT elisabethpfaehler asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT ivanzhovannik asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT lisewei asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT ronaldboellaard asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT andredekker asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT renemonshouwer asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT issamelnaqa asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT janbussink asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT robertgillies asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT leonardwee asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT albertotraverso asystematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT elisabethpfaehler systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT ivanzhovannik systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT lisewei systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT ronaldboellaard systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT andredekker systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT renemonshouwer systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT issamelnaqa systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT janbussink systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT robertgillies systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT leonardwee systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures AT albertotraverso systematicreviewandqualityofreportingchecklistforrepeatabilityandreproducibilityofradiomicfeatures |
| _version_ |
1718440662437724160 |