ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Deciphering the Prognostic Efficacy of MRI Radiomics in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictive performance of MRI and CT radiomics in predicting the response to induction chemotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Therapeutic Innovations in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: Current Strategies and Emerging Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This meta-analysis investigates the prognostic value of MRI-based radiomics in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatment outcomes, specifically focusing on overall survival (OS) variability. The study protocol was registered with INPLASY (INPLASY202420101). Initially, a systematic review identified 15 relevant studies involving 6243 patients through a comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool and the Radiomics Quality Score (RQS), highlighting a low risk of bias in most domains. Our analysis revealed a significant average concordance index (c-index) of 72% across studies, indicating the potential of radiomics in clinical prognostication. However, moderate heterogeneity was observed, particularly in OS predictions. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression identified validation methods and radiomics software as significant heterogeneity moderators. Notably, the number of features in the prognosis model correlated positively with its performance. These findings suggest radiomics' promising role in enhancing cancer treatment strategies, though the observed heterogeneity and potential biases call for cautious interpretation and standardization in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.