Evidence mapPaperPMID 40121118Full record

ArticleAcademic radiology2025

Assessing the Reliability of Pancreatic CT Imaging Biomarkers for Diabetes Prediction: A Dual Center Retrospective Study.

Abhinav Suri, Pritam Mukherjee, Nusrat Rabbee, Perry J Pickhardt, Ronald M Summers

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Academic radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Abhinav SuriDavid Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California (A.S.); Imaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Building 10, Room 1C224D MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 (A.S., P.M., R.M.S.).
Pritam MukherjeeImaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Building 10, Room 1C224D MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 (A.S., P.M., R.M.S.).
Nusrat RabbeeBiostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology Service, National Institutes of Health, Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (N.R.).
Perry J PickhardtUniversity of Wisconsin Madison School of Medicine, Madison, Wisconsin (P.J.P.).
Ronald M SummersImaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Building 10, Room 1C224D MSC 1182, Bethesda, MD 20892-1182 (A.S., P.M., R.M.S.). Electronic address: rms@nih.gov.

Funding

Computer Aided Detection for CT ColonographyZ01CL040003 · CLINICAL CENTER · 2003 to 2005
Computer Aided Detection for Radiologic ImagesZ01CL040004 · CLINICAL CENTER · 2003 to 2005
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 CL040003Intramural NIH HHS Z01 CL040004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE AND

objectivesPancreatic imaging biomarkers on CT imaging are known to be associated with diabetes. However, no studies have examined if these imaging biomarkers are resilient to changes in segmentation quality and contrast status. Here, we assess if imaging biomarkers are robust to variations in pancreatic segmentation quality and contrast status, and how these factors affect their ability to predict diabetes. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study selected patients with CT scans and corresponding HbA1c tests from two institutions. Patients were classified into two categories: having diabetes at the time or < 4 years after the scan (diabetic/incident) vs not having diabetes within 4 years after the scan (nondiabetic). Pancreatic imaging biomarkers, including average attenuation, intrapancreatic fat fraction, fractal dimension of the pancreatic boundary and volume, were measured using three pancreatic segmentation algorithms (TotalSegmentator, nnU-Net, and DM-UNet). Pairwise comparisons were made between algorithms when computing pancreatic imaging biomarker values for all patient scans. Predictive ability of imaging biomarkers (derived from each algorithm) was assessed for agreement between algorithms using a generalized additive model.

resultsA total of 9772 patients (age, 56.1 years ± 9.1 [SD]; 5407 females) were included in this study. Imaging biomarkers based on attenuation measurements showed high algorithm agreement (ICC ≥0.93), with lower agreement on measures not reliant on attenuation. Models trained on imaging biomarkers derived from these algorithms exhibited good predictive agreement (AUC for diabetes overall, 0.84-0.91; contrast scans, 0.73-0.80; noncontrast scans, 0.62-0.80). Algorithms achieved a positive predictive value of 0.79-0.84, and negative predictive value of 0.89-0.94.

conclusionAttenuation-based imaging biomarkers demonstrated robustness to segmentation algorithm quality and consistent predictive ability across different clinical scenarios. These findings suggest that CT-derived biomarkers could be a reliable tool for diabetes screening across multiple institutions.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusPancreasTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedAlgorithmsBiomarkersFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesBiomarkersGlycated HemoglobinComputed tomographyDiabetesImaging biomarkersPancreas segmentationReliability

Identifiers

PMID40121118
PMCPMC12213163

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.