A systematic review reporting quality of radiomics research in neuro oncology: toward clinical utility and quality improvement using high dimensional imaging features
To evaluate radiomics analysis in neuro oncologic studies according to a radiomics quality score (RQS) system to find room for improvement in clinical use. Pubmed and Embase were searched up the terms radiomics or radiogenomics and gliomas or glioblastomas until February 2019. From 189 articles, 51 original research articles reporting the diagnostic, prognostic, or predictive utility were selected. The quality of the methodology was evaluated according to the RQS. The adherence rates for the six key domains were evaluated: image protocol and reproducibility, feature reduction and validation, biologic/clinical utility, performance index, a high level of evidence, and open science. Subgroup analyses for journal type (imaging vs. clinical) and biomarker (diagnostic vs. prognostic/predictive) were performed. The median RQS was 11 out of 36 and adherence rate was 37.1% Only 29.4% performed external validation. The adherence rate was high for reporting imaging protocol (100% feature reduction (94.1% and discrimination statistics (96.1% but low for conducting test retest analysis (2% prospective study (3.9% demonstrating potential clinical utility (2% and open science (5.9% None of the studies conducted a phantom study or cost effectiveness analysis. Prognostic/predictive studies received higher score than diagnostic studies in comparison to gold standard (P .001) use of calibration (P .02) and cut off analysis (P .001) The quality of reporting of radiomics studies in neuro oncology is currently insufficient. Validation is necessary using external dataset, and improvements need to be made to feature reproducibility, demonstrating clinical utility, pursuits of a higher level of evidence, and open science.
BMC Cancer