Cited by 235Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationAI in cancer detection

Artificial intelligence: Deep learning in oncological radiomics and challenges of interpretability and data harmonization

Open access
Papadimitroulas, Panagiotis, Brocki, Lennart, Christopher Chung, Neo, Marchadour, Wistan, Vermet, Franck, Gaubert, Laurent, Eleftheriadis, Vasilis, Plachouris, Dimitris +3 more·2021·Physica Medica

Abstract

Over the last decade there has been an extensive evolution in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) field. Modern radiation oncology is based on the exploitation of advanced computational methods aiming to personalization and high diagnostic and therapeutic precision. The quantity of the available imaging data and the increased developments of Machine Learning (ML), particularly Deep Learning (DL), triggered the research on uncovering "hidden" biomarkers and quantitative features from anatomical and functional medical images. Deep Neural Networks (DNN) have achieved outstanding performance and broad implementation in image processing tasks. Lately, DNNs have been considered for radiomics and their potentials for explainable AI (XAI) may help classification and prediction in clinical practice. However, most of them are using limited datasets and lack generalized applicability. In this study we review the basics of radiomics feature extraction, DNNs in image analysis, and major interpretability methods that help enable explainable AI. Furthermore, we discuss the crucial requirement of multicenter recruitment of large datasets, increasing the biomarkers variability, so as to establish the potential clinical value of radiomics and the development of robust explainable AI models.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.03.009

Cites

159 of 159 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clinical adoption of multimodal XAI in oncology is constrained by limited interpretability and fragmented use of RWD.

    “Multimodal explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) is transforming oncology, yet its clinical adoption is constrained by limited interpretability and fragmented use of real-world data (RWD), including electronic medical records, geospatial data, and social determinants of health.”

    From X-CART: a multimodal real-world data pipeline for explainable AI-driven patient navigation in radiation oncology (2026) · cites this paper as [1]

    Section 1.3 (page unavailable) says interpretability is a challenge that must be addressed to facilitate clinical implementation of deep-learning models in oncological radiomics. Section 1.1 calls for integrating clinical, imaging and other data, but the paper does not establish fragmented use of real-world data—including geospatial data and social determinants of health—as the claimed constraint on adoption. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Information fusion and multimodal systems can have significant performance over systems working with a single type of data.

    “The information fusion and multimodal system can have a significant performance over the systems working with a single type of data [36,100].”
  • Challenges remain in data harmonization and generalizability of AI models in Radiation Oncology, such as small dataset size and varying feature extraction sensitivity.

    “Although promising, challenges remain in data harmonization and the generalizability of AI models in this area, such as small dataset size and varying feature extraction sensitivity.1”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 162 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Radiomics AH. there is more than meets the eye in medical imaging. Proceedings of the SPIE. 2016;9785.
  2. Lohmann P, Kocher M, Ruge MI, Visser-Vandewalle V, Shah NJ, Fink GR, et al. PET/MRI Radiomics inpatients with brain metastases. Front Neurol. 2020;11:1.
  3. Hatt M, Le Rest CC, Tixier F, Badic C, Schick U, Visvikis D. Data are also images. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:38S-44S.
  4. Distill. Feature Visualization: How neural networks build up their understanding of images. https://distill.pub/2017/feature-visualization/. Accessed on November 28, 2020.
  5. Samek W, Binder A, Montavon G, Lapuschkin S, Muller KR. Evaluating the Visualization of What a Deep Neural Network Has Learned. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst. 2017;28:2660-73.
  6. Pinto Dos Santos D, Dietzel M, Baessler B. A decade of radiomics research: are images really data or just patterns in the noise? Eur Radiol. 2021;31:1-4.
  7. Chatterjee A, Vallieres M, Dohan A. Creating robust predictive radiomic models for data from independent institutions using normalization. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma. Med Sci. 2019;1.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Papadimitroulas, P., Brocki, L., Christopher Chung, N., Marchadour, W., Vermet, F., Gaubert, L., Eleftheriadis, V., Plachouris, D., Visvikis, D., Kagadis, G. C., & Hatt, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Patras (GR)
  • University of Warsaw (PL)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Kagadis, George C.
Venue
Physica Medica
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-03
Volume
83
Pages
108-121
ISSN
1120-1797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3138961261
Cited by
226
References
162
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 11
FWCI
5.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physica Medica (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Commission (MIS- 5033021, 872735)
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-11-LABX-0020)
  • State Scholarships Foundation (MIS‐5033021, 5033021)
  • European Social Fund (MIS - 5033021, 5033021)
  • H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (872735)
  • CHIST-ERA (CHIST-ERA-19-XAI-007)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
Keywords
radiomics, deep learning, explainable AI, interpretability, data harmonization, radiation oncology, deep neural network, radiomic feature extraction, multi-center dataset, biomarkers, image analysis
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Neural Networks, Computer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review