Cited by 2,258Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications

Radiomics: the process and the challenges

Open access
Kumar, Virendra, Gu, Yuhua, Basu, Satrajit, Berglund, Anders, Eschrich, Steven A., Schabath, Matthew B., Forster, Kenneth, Aerts, Hugo J.W.L. +8 more·2012·Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Abstract

"Radiomics" refers to the extraction and analysis of large amounts of advanced quantitative imaging features with high throughput from medical images obtained with computed tomography, positron emission tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Importantly, these data are designed to be extracted from standard-of-care images, leading to a very large potential subject pool. Radiomics data are in a mineable form that can be used to build descriptive and predictive models relating image features to phenotypes or gene-protein signatures. The core hypothesis of radiomics is that these models, which can include biological or medical data, can provide valuable diagnostic, prognostic or predictive information. The radiomics enterprise can be divided into distinct processes, each with its own challenges that need to be overcome: (a) image acquisition and reconstruction, (b) image segmentation and rendering, (c) feature extraction and feature qualification and (d) databases and data sharing for eventual (e) ad hoc informatics analyses. Each of these individual processes poses unique challenges. For example, optimum protocols for image acquisition and reconstruction have to be identified and harmonized. Also, segmentations have to be robust and involve minimal operator input. Features have to be generated that robustly reflect the complexity of the individual volumes, but cannot be overly complex or redundant. Furthermore, informatics databases that allow incorporation of image features and image annotations, along with medical and genetic data, have to be generated. Finally, the statistical approaches to analyze these data have to be optimized, as radiomics is not a mature field of study. Each of these processes will be discussed in turn, as well as some of their unique challenges and proposed approaches to solve them. The focus of this article will be on images of non-small-cell lung cancer.

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.mri.2012.06.010

Cites

99 of 99 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?

  • The first study to identify, define, and extract more agnostic features used 182 texture features in combination with 22 semantic features to describe CT images of lung cancer.

    “The first such study used 182 texture features in combination with 22 semantic features to describe CT images of lung cancer (24).”

    From Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data (2016) · cites this paper as [24]

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

5 of the 104 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [85]Jain A Dubes R Algorithms that cluster data 1988 Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kumar, V., Gu, Y., Basu, S., Berglund, A., Eschrich, S. A., Schabath, M. B., Forster, K., Aerts, H. J. W. L., Dekker, A., Fenstermacher, D., Goldgof, D. B., Hall, L. O., Lambin, P., Balagurunathan, Y., Gatenby, R. A., & Gillies, R. J.
Affiliations
  • Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
Corresponding author
Gillies, Robert J.
Venue
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-11
Volume
30
Issue
9
Pages
1234-1248
ISSN
0730-725X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2097475056
Cited by
2,258
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 106 · 2025: 189 · 2024: 224 · 2023: 236 · 2022: 277 · 2021: 290 · 2020: 253 · 2019: 209 · 2018: 190 · 2017: 127 · 2016: 86 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
16.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Radiological Society of North America
  • National Cancer Institute (U01CA143062, P30CA076292)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
radiomics, quantitative imaging features, image segmentation, feature extraction, data sharing, non-small cell lung cancer, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, prediction model
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Lung Neoplasms, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Medical Informatics, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Risk Factors, Software, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Multivariate Analysis, Radiation Oncology, Phantoms, Imaging, Positron-Emission Tomography

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