Radiomic-Based Approaches in the Multi-metastatic Setting: a Quantitative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Radiomics traditionally focuses on analyzing a single lesion within a patient to extract tumor characteristics, yet this process may overlook inter-lesion heterogeneity, particularly in the multi-metastatic setting. There is currently no established method for combining radiomic features in such settings, leading to diverse approaches with varying strengths and limitations. Our quantitative review aims to illuminate these methodologies, assess their replicability, and guide future research toward establishing best practices, offering insights into the challenges of multi-lesion radiomic analysis across diverse datasets. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search to identify methods for integrating data from multiple lesions in radiomic analyses. We replicated these methods using either the author's code or by reconstructing them based on the information provided in the papers. Subsequently, we applied these identified methods to three distinct datasets, each depicting a different metastatic scenario. Results We compared ten mathematical methods for combining radiomic features across three distinct datasets, encompassing a total of 16,850 lesions in 3,930 patients. Performance of these methods was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model and benchmarked against univariable analysis of total tumor volume. We observed variable performance in methods across datasets. However, no single method consistently outperformed others across all datasets. Notably, while some methods surpassed total tumor volume analysis in certain datasets, others did not. Averaging methods showed higher median performance in patients with colorectal liver metastases, and in soft tissue sarcoma, concatenation of radiomic features from different lesions exhibited the highest median performance among tested methods. Conclusions Radiomic features can be effectively selected or combined to estimate patient-level outcomes in multi-metastatic patients, though the approach varies by metastatic setting. Our study fills a critical gap in radiomics research by examining the challenges of radiomic-based analysis in this setting. Through a comprehensive review and rigorous testing of different methods across diverse datasets representing unique metastatic scenarios, we provide valuable insights into effective radiomic analysis strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".