4.6 Review

Imaging-Based Prediction of Molecular Therapy Targets in NSCLC by Radiogenomics and AI Approaches: A Systematic Review

Journal

DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics10060359

Keywords

radiogenomics; CT; PET/CT; lung cancer; EGFR; ALK; PD-L1; artificial intelligence; radiomics; targeted therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this systematic review was to analyze the current state of the art of imaging-derived biomarkers predictive of genetic alterations and immunotherapy targets in lung cancer. We included original research studies reporting the development and validation of imaging feature-based models. The overall quality, the standard of reporting and the advancements towards clinical practice were assessed. Eighteen out of the 24 selected articles were classified as high-quality studies according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). The 18 high-quality papers adhered to Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) with a mean of 62.9%. The majority of high-quality studies (16/18) were classified as phase II. The most commonly used imaging predictors were radiomic features, followed by visual qualitative computed tomography (CT) features, convolutional neural network-based approaches and positron emission tomography (PET) parameters, all used alone or combined with clinicopathologic features. The majority (14/18) were focused on the prediction of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Thirty-five imaging-based models were built to predict the EGFR status. The model's performances ranged from weak (n= 5) to acceptable (n= 11), to excellent (n= 18) and outstanding (n= 1) in the validation set. Positive outcomes were also reported for the prediction of ALK rearrangement, ALK/ROS1/RET fusions and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Despite the promising results in terms of predictive performance, image-based models, suffering from methodological bias, require further validation before replacing traditional molecular pathology testing.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available