Performance of Radiomics and Deep Learning Models in Predicting Distant Metastases in Soft Tissue Sarcomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Authors
Affiliations (5)
Affiliations (5)
- Department of Radiology, Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (P.M., S.H., H.S.K., A.A., M.C.).
- School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran (P.V.).
- Department of Radiology, Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (P.M., S.H., H.S.K., A.A., M.C.). Electronic address: [email protected].
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle WA (M.J.N., S.K.S.).
- Department of Radiology, Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (P.M., S.H., H.S.K., A.A., M.C.). Electronic address: [email protected].
Abstract
Predicting distant metastases in soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is vital for guiding clinical decision-making. Recent advancements in radiomics and deep learning (DL) models have shown promise, but their diagnostic accuracy remains unclear. This meta-analysis aims to assess the performance of radiomics and DL-based models in predicting metastases in STS by analyzing pooled sensitivity and specificity. Following PRISMA guidelines, a thorough search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. Subgroup analyses were performed based on imaging modality (MRI, PET, PET/CT), feature extraction method (DL radiomics [DLR] vs. handcrafted radiomics [HCR]), incorporation of clinical features, and dataset used. Heterogeneity by I² statistic, leave-one-out sensitivity analyses, and publication bias by Egger's test assessed model robustness and potential biases. Ninetheen studies involving 1712 patients were included. The pooled AUC for predicting metastasis was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80-0.92). The pooled AUC values were 88% (95% CI: 77-89%) for MRI-based models, 80% (95% CI: 76-92%) for PET-based models, and 91% (95% CI: 78-93%) for PET/CT-based models, with no significant differences (p = 0.75). DL-based models showed significantly higher sensitivity than HCR models (p < 0.01). Including clinical features did not significantly improve model performance (AUC: 0.90 vs. 0.88, p = 0.99). Significant heterogeneity was noted (I² > 25%), and Egger's test suggested potential publication bias (p < 0.001). Radiomics models showed promising potential for predicting metastases in STSs, with DL approaches outperforming traditional HCR. While integrating this approach into routine clinical practice is still evolving, it can aid physicians in identifying high-risk patients and implementing targeted monitoring strategies to reduce the risk of severe complications associated with metastasis. However, challenges such as heterogeneity, limited external validation, and potential publication bias persist. Future research should concentrate on standardizing imaging protocols and conducting multi-center validation studies to improve the clinical applicability of radiomics predictive models.