Cited by 819Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationAI in cancer detection

Predicting cancer outcomes with radiomics and artificial intelligence in radiology

Open access
Bera, Kaustav, Braman, Nathaniel, Gupta, Amit, Velcheti, Vamsidhar, Madabhushi, Anant·2022·Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology

Abstract

The successful use of artificial intelligence (AI) for diagnostic purposes has prompted the application of AI-based cancer imaging analysis to address other, more complex, clinical needs. In this Perspective, we discuss the next generation of challenges in clinical decision-making that AI tools can solve using radiology images, such as prognostication of outcome across multiple cancers, prediction of response to various treatment modalities, discrimination of benign treatment confounders from true progression, identification of unusual response patterns and prediction of the mutational and molecular profile of tumours. We describe the evolution of and opportunities for AI in oncology imaging, focusing on hand-crafted radiomic approaches and deep learning-derived representations, with examples of their application for decision support. We also address the challenges faced on the path to clinical adoption, including data curation and annotation, interpretability, and regulatory and reimbursement issues. We hope to demystify AI in radiology for clinicians by helping them to understand its limitations and challenges, as well as the opportunities it provides as a decision-support tool in cancer management.

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 · 10.1038/s41571-021-00560-7

Cites

179 of 179 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

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

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. [11]FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group. BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource (FDA, 2016). 27010052
  2. [29]Eben J, Braman N & Madabhushi A in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention Vol. 11767 (eds Shen D et al.) 602– 610 (Springer, 2019).
  3. [57]Antunes J in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention Vol. 11767 (eds Shen D et al.) 611– 619 (Springer, 2019).
  4. [78]Braman N, Prasanna P, Alilou M, Beig N & Madabhushi A in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention Vol. 11071 (eds Frangi AF, Schnabel JA, Davatzikos C, Alberola-López C& Fichtinger G) 803– 811 (Springer, 2018).
  5. [87]Zhou T in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention Vol. 12262 (eds Martel AL et al.) 221– 231 (Springer, 2020).
  6. [99]Drukker K, Edwards A, Papaioannou J & Giger M Deep learning predicts breast cancer recurrence in analysis of consecutive MRIs acquired during the course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Proc. SPIE 11314, 1131410 (2020).
  7. [133]Yang J in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention Vol. 12262 (eds Martel AL et al.) 211– 220 (2020).
  8. [160]Institute of Medicine. Policy Issues in the Development of Personalized Medicine in Oncology: Workshop Summary (National Academies, 2010). 25032365

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bera, K., Braman, N., Gupta, A., Velcheti, V., & Madabhushi, A.
Affiliations
  • University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center (US)
  • Tempus Labs (United States) (US)
  • NYU Langone Health (US)
  • Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Madabhushi, Anant
Venue
Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology
Published
2021-10-18
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
132-146
ISSN
  • 1759-4774 (ISSN-L)
  • 1759-4782
OpenAlex
W3205076722
Cited by
819
References
179
Citations by year
2026: 155 · 2025: 259 · 2024: 212 · 2023: 130 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 4
FWCI
16.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (IK6 BX006185, I01 BX004121)
  • National Institutes of Health (5u54ca254566-04, UL1TR002548)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL158071, R01HL151277)
  • National Cancer Institute (U01CA248226, U54CA254566, U24CA199374, F31CA221383, R01CA216579, U01CA239055, R01CA208236, R01CA202752, R01CA220581, R01CA257612, R01CA249992)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R43EB028736, R43EB015199, T32EB007509)
  • National Center for Research Resources (C06RR012463)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
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, artificial intelligence, tumor imaging, cancer outcome prediction, treatment response prediction, deep learning, clinical decision support, tumor molecular profiling, interpretability, data annotation, clinical adoption
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Neoplasms, Radiometry, Treatment Outcome

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