External Validation of a CT-Based Radiogenomics Model for the Detection of EGFR Mutation in NSCLC and the Impact of Prevalence in Model Building by Using Synthetic Minority Over Sampling (SMOTE): Lessons Learned
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Radiogenomics holds promise in identifying molecular alterations in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using imaging features. Previously, we developed a radiogenomics model to predict epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations based on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) in NSCLC patients. The current study aimed to externally validate this model using a publicly available National Institutes of Health (NIH)-based NSCLC dataset and assess the effect of EGFR mutation prevalence on model performance through synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The original radiogenomics model was validated on an independent NIH cohort (n=140). For assessing the influence of disease prevalence, six SMOTE-augmented datasets were created, simulating EGFR mutation prevalence from 25% to 50%. Seven models were developed (one from original data, six SMOTE-augmented), each undergoing rigorous cross-validation, feature selection, and logistic regression modeling. Models were tested against the NIH cohort. Performance was compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Area Under the Curve [AUC]), and differences between radiomic-only, clinical-only, and combined models were statistically assessed. RESULTS: External validation revealed poor diagnostic performance for both our model and a previously published EGFR radiomics model (AUC ∼0.5). The clinical model alone achieved higher diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.74). SMOTE-augmented models showed increased sensitivity but did not improve overall AUC compared to the clinical-only model. Changing EGFR mutation prevalence had minimal impact on AUC, challenging previous assumptions about the influence of sample imbalance on model performance. CONCLUSION: External validation failed to reproduce prior radiogenomics model performance, while clinical variables alone retained strong predictive value. SMOTE-based oversampling did not improve diagnostic accuracy, suggesting that, in EGFR prediction, radiomics may offer limited value beyond clinical data. Emphasis on robust external validation and data-sharing is essential for future clinical implementation of radiogenomic models.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".