Objectives: To evaluate the methodological quality and diagnostic accuracy of MRI-based radiomic studies predicting O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status in gliomas. Methods: PubMed Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched to identify MRI-based radiomic studies on MGMT methylation in gliomas published until December 31, 2022. Three raters evaluated the study methodological quality with Radiomics Quality Score (RQS, 16 components) and Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD, 22 items) scales. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed with QUADAS-2 tool. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate the pooled area under the curve (AUC) and to assess inter-study heterogeneity. Results: We included 26 studies, published from 2016. The median RQS total score was 8 out of 36 (22%, range 8-44%). Thirteen studies performed external validation. All studies reported AUC or accuracy, but only 4 (15%) performed calibration and decision curve analysis. No studies performed phantom analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and prospective validation. The overall TRIPOD adherence score was between 50% and 70% in 16 studies and below 50% in 10 studies. The pooled AUC was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73-0.83, I2 = 94.1%) with a high inter-study heterogeneity. Studies with external validation and including only WHO-grade IV gliomas had significantly lower AUC values (0.65; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Study RQS and adherence to TRIPOD guidelines was generally low. Radiomic prediction of MGMT methylation status showed great heterogeneity of results and lower performances in grade IV gliomas, which hinders its current implementation in clinical practice. Clinical relevance statement: MGMT promoter methylation status appears to be variably correlated with MRI radiomic features; radiomic models are not sufficiently robust to be integrated into clinical practice to accurately predict MGMT promoter methylation status in patients with glioma before surgery. Key points: • Adherence to the indications of TRIPOD guidelines was generally low, as was RQS total score. • MGMT promoter methylation status prediction with MRI radiomic features provided heterogeneous diagnostic accuracy results across studies. • Studies that included grade IV glioma only and performed external validation had significantly lower diagnostic accuracy than others.

Quality assessment of the MRI-radiomics studies for MGMT promoter methylation prediction in glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis / F.M. Doniselli, R. Pascuzzo, F. Mazzi, F. Padelli, M. Moscatelli, T. Akinci D’Antonoli, R. Cuocolo, D. Aquino, V. Cuccarini, L.M. Sconfienza. - In: EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY. - ISSN 1432-1084. - (2024), pp. 1-14. [Epub ahead of print] [10.1007/s00330-024-10594-x]

Quality assessment of the MRI-radiomics studies for MGMT promoter methylation prediction in glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

M. Moscatelli;L.M. Sconfienza
Ultimo
2024

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the methodological quality and diagnostic accuracy of MRI-based radiomic studies predicting O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status in gliomas. Methods: PubMed Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched to identify MRI-based radiomic studies on MGMT methylation in gliomas published until December 31, 2022. Three raters evaluated the study methodological quality with Radiomics Quality Score (RQS, 16 components) and Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD, 22 items) scales. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed with QUADAS-2 tool. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate the pooled area under the curve (AUC) and to assess inter-study heterogeneity. Results: We included 26 studies, published from 2016. The median RQS total score was 8 out of 36 (22%, range 8-44%). Thirteen studies performed external validation. All studies reported AUC or accuracy, but only 4 (15%) performed calibration and decision curve analysis. No studies performed phantom analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and prospective validation. The overall TRIPOD adherence score was between 50% and 70% in 16 studies and below 50% in 10 studies. The pooled AUC was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73-0.83, I2 = 94.1%) with a high inter-study heterogeneity. Studies with external validation and including only WHO-grade IV gliomas had significantly lower AUC values (0.65; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Study RQS and adherence to TRIPOD guidelines was generally low. Radiomic prediction of MGMT methylation status showed great heterogeneity of results and lower performances in grade IV gliomas, which hinders its current implementation in clinical practice. Clinical relevance statement: MGMT promoter methylation status appears to be variably correlated with MRI radiomic features; radiomic models are not sufficiently robust to be integrated into clinical practice to accurately predict MGMT promoter methylation status in patients with glioma before surgery. Key points: • Adherence to the indications of TRIPOD guidelines was generally low, as was RQS total score. • MGMT promoter methylation status prediction with MRI radiomic features provided heterogeneous diagnostic accuracy results across studies. • Studies that included grade IV glioma only and performed external validation had significantly lower diagnostic accuracy than others.
Glioma; Magnetic resonance imaging; Meta-analysis; O(6)-Methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase; Systematic review
Settore MED/36 - Diagnostica per Immagini e Radioterapia
2024
3-feb-2024
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
s00330-024-10594-x.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Article
Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 1.83 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.83 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/1027308
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact