MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414020066 · doi:10.1111/coa.70031

Role of Radiomics to Predict Disease Recurrence in Sinonasal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2025· review· en· W4414020066 on OpenAlexaff
Caitlin Waters, Hugo C. Temperley, Holly Jones, Niall J. O’Sullivan, Alison McHugh, Fariba Tohidinezhad, Thavakumar Subramaniam

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Otolaryngology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiomicsMeta-analysisMEDLINESystematic reviewInternal medicineBasal cellOncologyRetrospective cohort studyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Radiomics offers the potential to predict oncological outcomes from pre-operative imaging, aiding in the identification of 'high risk' patients with sinonasal cancer who are at an increased risk of recurrence. This study aims to comprehensively review the current literature on the role of radiomics as a predictor of disease recurrence in sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science databases. Retrospective and prospective studies examining the use of radiomics to predict post-operative recurrence in sinonasal cancer that met the inclusion criteria were included. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 and Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) tools. RESULTS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 638 participants. All studies were single-centre and utilised MRI-based radiomics in the construction of their models. Radiomic models demonstrated excellent predictive performance. The median AUC, sensitivity and specificity were 0.947, 0.86 and 0.923 in the training set, and 0.914, 0.833 and 0.878 in the validation set. A pooled meta-analysis estimated the combined AUC across training sets as 0.931 (95% CI, 0.898-0.963) and 0.922 (95% CI, 0.880-0.964) for validation sets. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review provides evidence supporting the role of radiomics in predicting post-operative disease recurrence in sinonasal cancer. Radiomics shows promise in enhancing personalised treatment strategies by improving prognostic accuracy. However, further research is needed to standardise methodologies and validate these findings in larger, multicentre cohorts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.031
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical OtolaryngologySame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207