2019
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06384-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radiomics of small renal masses on multiphasic CT: accuracy of machine learning–based classification models for the differentiation of renal cell carcinoma and angiomyolipoma without visible fat

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
36
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
3
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This study also employed a novel method of using classifier fusion for MVI prediction modeling, such as a process analogous to disease diagnosis by a MDT, produce more reliable and accurate predictions compared with a single classifier. This was based on two reasons: 1) First, there is large performance differences between different classifiers, which has been confirmed in our previous study (31). It is not practical to select a suitable classifier for a given task from a large pool of classifiers, since different classifiers are built on different mathematical grounds; 2) Second, fusion of classifiers has been proved to generate more stable and reproducible classification performance than an individual classifier, and is effective in improving classification/prediction accuracy in decision-making (32,32,(42)(43)(44).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 62%
“…This study also employed a novel method of using classifier fusion for MVI prediction modeling, such as a process analogous to disease diagnosis by a MDT, produce more reliable and accurate predictions compared with a single classifier. This was based on two reasons: 1) First, there is large performance differences between different classifiers, which has been confirmed in our previous study (31). It is not practical to select a suitable classifier for a given task from a large pool of classifiers, since different classifiers are built on different mathematical grounds; 2) Second, fusion of classifiers has been proved to generate more stable and reproducible classification performance than an individual classifier, and is effective in improving classification/prediction accuracy in decision-making (32,32,(42)(43)(44).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 62%
“…Likewise, other studies focusing on the value of radiomics in predicting Fuhrman grade of ccRCC also revealed that models based on nephrographic phase had the highest discrimination power and contained more radiomics features than models based on other phases (10)(11)(12)). Yet, several researchers reported that the unenhanced phase had better performance in differentiating RCC and angiomyolipoma than other phases (27,28), suggesting that radiomics features from distinct CT phases might have different advantages in distinct areas.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By applying artificial neural network (ANN) classifiers, Yan et al showed that texture analysis (TA) may be a reliable quantitative strategy to differentiate between AMLwvf, ccRCC, and pRCC with an accuracy in the range of 90.7-100% based on three-phasic CECT scan images [20]. Other investigations employed similar strategies, although with ML-based TA from CECT images, and they reported higher accuracy (93.9%) and AUC (0.955) [21,24]. Moreover, Cui et al proposed an automatic computer identification system to differentiate AMLwvf from all RCC subtypes from whole-tumor CECT images using an over-sampling technique to increase the sample volume of AMLwvf [23].…”
Section: Angiomyolipoma (Amlwvf) Vs Rcc Subtypesmentioning
confidence: 99%