Diagnostic performance of radiomics for predicting osteoporosis in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Osteoporosis International Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1007/s00198-024-07136-y
Ling Deng, Ping Shuai, Youren Liu, Tao Yong, Yuping Liu, Hang Li, Xiaoxia Zheng
{"title":"Diagnostic performance of radiomics for predicting osteoporosis in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ling Deng, Ping Shuai, Youren Liu, Tao Yong, Yuping Liu, Hang Li, Xiaoxia Zheng","doi":"10.1007/s00198-024-07136-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of radiomics for predicting osteoporosis and the quality of radiomic studies. The study protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023425058). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 1, 2023, for eligible articles that applied radiomic techniques to diagnosing osteoporosis or abnormal bone mass. Quality and risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated with radiomics quality score (RQS), METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tools. The data analysis utilized the R program with mada, metafor, and meta packages. Ten retrospective studies with 5926 participants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall risk of bias and applicability concerns for each domain of the studies were rated as low, except for one study which was considered to have a high risk of flow and time bias. The mean METRICS score was 70.1% (range 49.6-83.2%). There was moderate heterogeneity across studies and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity in the data, including imaging modality, feature selection method, and classifier. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) under the bivariate random effects model across the studies was 57.22 (95% CI 27.62-118.52). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 87% (95% CI 81-92%) and 87% (95% CI 77-93%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the radiomic models was 0.94 (range 0.8 to 0.98). The results supported that the radiomic techniques had good accuracy in diagnosing osteoporosis or abnormal bone mass. The application of radiomics in osteoporosis diagnosis needs to be further confirmed by more prospective studies with rigorous adherence to existing guidelines and multicenter validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19638,"journal":{"name":"Osteoporosis International","volume":" ","pages":"1693-1707"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osteoporosis International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-024-07136-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of radiomics for predicting osteoporosis and the quality of radiomic studies. The study protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023425058). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 1, 2023, for eligible articles that applied radiomic techniques to diagnosing osteoporosis or abnormal bone mass. Quality and risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated with radiomics quality score (RQS), METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tools. The data analysis utilized the R program with mada, metafor, and meta packages. Ten retrospective studies with 5926 participants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall risk of bias and applicability concerns for each domain of the studies were rated as low, except for one study which was considered to have a high risk of flow and time bias. The mean METRICS score was 70.1% (range 49.6-83.2%). There was moderate heterogeneity across studies and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity in the data, including imaging modality, feature selection method, and classifier. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) under the bivariate random effects model across the studies was 57.22 (95% CI 27.62-118.52). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 87% (95% CI 81-92%) and 87% (95% CI 77-93%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the radiomic models was 0.94 (range 0.8 to 0.98). The results supported that the radiomic techniques had good accuracy in diagnosing osteoporosis or abnormal bone mass. The application of radiomics in osteoporosis diagnosis needs to be further confirmed by more prospective studies with rigorous adherence to existing guidelines and multicenter validation.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
放射组学在预测成人骨质疏松症方面的诊断性能:系统综述和荟萃分析。
本研究旨在评估放射线组学在预测骨质疏松症方面的诊断准确性以及放射线组学研究的质量。研究方案在 PROSPERO(CRD42023425058)上进行了前瞻性注册。我们检索了 PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中从开始到 2023 年 6 月 1 日符合条件的应用放射学技术诊断骨质疏松症或异常骨量的文章。采用放射组学质量评分(RQS)、METhodological RadiomICs Score(METRICS)和诊断准确性研究质量评估-2(QUADAS-2)工具对纳入研究的质量和偏倚风险进行评估。数据分析使用了 R 程序和 mada、metafor 和 meta 软件包。系统综述和荟萃分析共纳入了 10 项回顾性研究,共有 5926 名参与者。除一项研究被认为具有较高的流量和时间偏倚风险外,其他研究在每个领域的总体偏倚风险和适用性问题均被评为较低。平均 METRICS 得分为 70.1%(范围为 49.6-83.2%)。各研究之间存在中度异质性,元回归确定了数据的异质性来源,包括成像方式、特征选择方法和分类器。在双变量随机效应模型下,各研究的汇总诊断几率比(DOR)为 57.22(95% CI 27.62-118.52)。汇总的敏感性和特异性分别为 87% (95% CI 81-92%) 和 87% (95% CI 77-93%)。放射学模型的接收者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)为 0.94(范围为 0.8 至 0.98)。结果表明,放射组学技术在诊断骨质疏松症或骨量异常方面具有良好的准确性。放射组学在骨质疏松症诊断中的应用还需要更多的前瞻性研究进一步证实,这些研究应严格遵守现有指南并进行多中心验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Osteoporosis International
Osteoporosis International 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: An international multi-disciplinary journal which is a joint initiative between the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, Osteoporosis International provides a forum for the communication and exchange of current ideas concerning the diagnosis, prevention, treatment and management of osteoporosis and other metabolic bone diseases. It publishes: original papers - reporting progress and results in all areas of osteoporosis and its related fields; review articles - reflecting the present state of knowledge in special areas of summarizing limited themes in which discussion has led to clearly defined conclusions; educational articles - giving information on the progress of a topic of particular interest; case reports - of uncommon or interesting presentations of the condition. While focusing on clinical research, the Journal will also accept submissions on more basic aspects of research, where they are considered by the editors to be relevant to the human disease spectrum.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Exposure to air pollution might decrease bone mineral density and increase the prevalence of osteoporosis: A mendelian randomization study. Type 2 diabetes incidence in patients initiating denosumab or alendronate treatment: a primary care cohort study. Real-world efficacy of a teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) compared with reference teriparatide on bone mineral density, trabecular bone score, and bone parameters assessed using quantitative ultrasound, 3D-SHAPER® and high-resolution peripheral computer tomography in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and very high fracture risk. One versus 2 years of alendronate following denosumab: the CARD extension. Association of proton-density fat fraction with osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1