Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2025
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the utility of quantitative, imaging-based approaches to predict radiation-induced toxicity in lung cancer patients.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tong Daniel, Midroni Julie, Avison Kate, Alnassar Saif, Chen David, Parsa Rod, Yariv Orly, Liu Zhihui, Ye Xiang Y, Hope Andrew, Wong Philip, Raman Srinivas
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the performance of radiomics, dosiomics and machine learning in generating toxicity prediction in thoracic radiotherapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic database search was conducted and dual-screened by independent authors to identify eligible studies for systematic review and meta-analysis. Data was extracted and study quality was assessed using TRIPOD for machine learning studies, RQS for Radiomics and RoB for dosiomics.
RESULTS: 10,703 studies were identified, and 5,252 entered screening. 104 studies including 23,373 patients were eligible for systematic review. Primary toxicity predicted was radiation pneumonitis (81), followed by esophagitis (12) and lymphopenia (4). Fourty-two studies studying radiation pneumonitis were eligible for meta-analysis, with pooled area-under-curve (AUC) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.85). Studies with machine learning had the best performance, with classical and deep learning models having similar performance. There is a trend towards an improvement of the performance of models with the year of publication. There is variability in study quality among the three study categories and dosiomic studies scored the highest among these. Publication bias was not observed.
CONCLUSION: The majority of existing literature using radiomics, dosiomics and machine learning has focused on radiation pneumonitis prediction. Future research should focus on toxicity prediction of other organs at risk and the adoption of these models into clinical practice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic database search was conducted and dual-screened by independent authors to identify eligible studies for systematic review and meta-analysis. Data was extracted and study quality was assessed using TRIPOD for machine learning studies, RQS for Radiomics and RoB for dosiomics.
RESULTS: 10,703 studies were identified, and 5,252 entered screening. 104 studies including 23,373 patients were eligible for systematic review. Primary toxicity predicted was radiation pneumonitis (81), followed by esophagitis (12) and lymphopenia (4). Fourty-two studies studying radiation pneumonitis were eligible for meta-analysis, with pooled area-under-curve (AUC) of 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.85). Studies with machine learning had the best performance, with classical and deep learning models having similar performance. There is a trend towards an improvement of the performance of models with the year of publication. There is variability in study quality among the three study categories and dosiomic studies scored the highest among these. Publication bias was not observed.
CONCLUSION: The majority of existing literature using radiomics, dosiomics and machine learning has focused on radiation pneumonitis prediction. Future research should focus on toxicity prediction of other organs at risk and the adoption of these models into clinical practice.