Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37922931›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Oncology2023

A CT-based radiomics classification model for the prediction of histological type and tumour grade in retroperitoneal sarcoma (RADSARC-R): a retrospective multicohort analysis.

Amani Arthur, Matthew R Orton, Robby Emsley, Sharon Vit, Christian Kelly-Morland, Dirk Strauss, Jason Lunn, Simon Doran, Hafida Lmalem, Axelle Nzokirantevye and 16 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

26 authors at 14 institutions in 7 countries.

Amani ArthurThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Matthew R OrtonThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Robby EmsleyThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Sharon VitThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Christian Kelly-MorlandThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Dirk StraussThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jason LunnThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Simon DoranThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Hafida LmalemThe European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Axelle NzokirantevyeThe European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Saskia LitiereThe European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Sylvie BonvalotInstitut Curie, Hopital de Paris, Paris, France.
Rick HaasThe Netherlands Cancer Institute (Antoni Van Leeuwenhoekziekenhuis), Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Alessandro GronchiDepartment of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Dirk Van GestelInstitut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Anne DucassouCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse, Toulouse, France; Institut Claudius Regaud, Toulouse, France; Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Chandrajit P RautBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Pierre MeeusCentre Leon Berard, Lyon, France.
Mateusz SpalekMaria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland.
Matthew HattonSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Cecile Le PechouxGustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Khin ThwayThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Cyril FisherUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Robin JonesThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Paul H HuangThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Christina MessiouThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. Electronic address: christina.messiou@rmh.nhs.uk.
Institute of Cancer Research · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer · BEBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse · FRCentre Léon Bérard · FRFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITInstitut Curie · FRInstitut Gustave Roussy · FRSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology · PLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BEUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetroperitoneal sarcomas are tumours with a poor prognosis. Upfront characterisation of the tumour is difficult, and under-grading is common. Radiomics has the potential to non-invasively characterise the so-called radiological phenotype of tumours. We aimed to develop and independently validate a CT-based radiomics classification model for the prediction of histological type and grade in retroperitoneal leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma.

methodsA retrospective discovery cohort was collated at our centre (Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK) and an independent validation cohort comprising patients recruited in the phase 3 STRASS study of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in retroperitoneal sarcoma. Patients aged older than 18 years with confirmed primary leiomyosarcoma or liposarcoma proceeding to surgical resection with available contrast-enhanced CT scans were included. Using the discovery dataset, a CT-based radiomics workflow was developed, including manual delineation, sub-segmentation, feature extraction, and predictive model building. Separate probabilistic classifiers for the prediction of histological type and low versus intermediate or high grade tumour types were built and tested. Independent validation was then performed. The primary objective of the study was to develop radiomic classification models for the prediction of retroperitoneal leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma type and histological grade.

findings170 patients recruited between Oct 30, 2016, and Dec 23, 2020, were eligible in the discovery cohort and 89 patients recruited between Jan 18, 2012, and April 10, 2017, were eligible in the validation cohort. In the discovery cohort, the median age was 63 years (range 27-89), with 83 (49%) female and 87 (51%) male patients. In the validation cohort, median age was 59 years (range 33-77), with 46 (52%) female and 43 (48%) male patients. The highest performing model for the prediction of histological type had an area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) of 0·928 on validation, based on a feature set of radiomics and approximate radiomic volume fraction. The highest performing model for the prediction of histological grade had an AUROC of 0·882 on validation, based on a radiomics feature set.

interpretationOur validated radiomics model can predict the histological type and grade of retroperitoneal sarcomas with excellent performance. This could have important implications for improving diagnosis and risk stratification in retroperitoneal sarcomas.

fundingWellcome Trust, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group, the National Institutes for Health, and the National Institute for Health and Care Research Biomedical Research Centre at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research.

Indexed as

LeiomyosarcomaLiposarcomaRetroperitoneal NeoplasmsSarcomaSoft Tissue NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID37922931
PMCPMC10618402
OpenAlexW4388085336

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.