ReviewCureus2025
Diagnostic Performance of Radiomics Modeling in Predicting the Human Papillomavirus Status of Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- HPV-specific innovations and controversies in therapeutic strategies for HPV-associated oropharyngeal carcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Habitat Radiomics Predict HPV Status in Oropharyngeal Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review, we sought to assess the diagnostic performance and methodological quality of studies utilizing radiomics for the prediction of human papillomavirus (HPV) status in patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Ovid, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception until June 7, 2022, was performed to identify eligible studies. Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to the identified studies. Data collection was performed by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved by consensus review with a third reviewer. In total, 14 articles were chosen, with a total of 15 radiomics models. Of the included studies, 12 models reported sensitivity, with a mean of 0.778 (standard deviation (SD) = 0.073). Similarly, 12 models reported specificity, with a mean of 0.751 (SD = 0.111). The area under the curve (AUC) was reported by all 15 models, with a mean of 0.814 (SD = 0.081). Finally, accuracy was reported by eight models, with a mean of 0.768 (SD = 0.044). A meta-analysis was performed on eight studies that reported AUCs with confidence intervals (CIs), returning a pooled AUC of 0.764 (95% CI = 0.758 to 0.770). The Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) was applied to each included study as a measure of quality. RQS ranged from -1 to 22, with a mean of 13.4 and an intraclass coefficient of 0.874. Radiomics modeling has shown promise in serving as a diagnostic indicator for HPV status in patients with oropharyngeal cancer. Nevertheless, the quality of research methodologies in this area is a limiting factor for its broader clinical application and highlights the need for enhanced funding to support further research efforts.
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.