Evidence Hub

A CT-based radiomics predictive nomogram to identify pulmonary tuberculosis from community-acquired pneumonia: a multicenter cohort study

Pu-Lin Li, Ji-Ling Wang, Min Tang, Min Li, Rui Han, Sijing Zhou, Xing-Wan Wu, Ran Wang

Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, 2024

195 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Purpose To develop a predictive nomogram based on computed tomography (CT) radiomics to distinguish pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) from community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Methods A total of 195 PTB patients and 163 CAP patients were enrolled from three hospitals. It is divided into a training cohort, a testing cohort and validation cohort. Clinical models were established by using significantly correlated clinical features. Radiomics features were screened by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) algorithm. Radiomics scores (Radscore) were calculated from the formula of radiomics features. Clinical radiomics conjoint nomogram was established according to Radscore and clinical features, and the diagnostic performance of the model was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results Two clinical features and 12 radiomic features were selected as optimal predictors for the establishment of clinical radiomics conjoint nomogram. The results showed that the predictive nomogram had an outstanding ability to discriminate between the two diseases, and the AUC of the training cohort was 0.947 (95% CI, 0.916-0.979), testing cohort was 0.888 (95% CI, 0.814-0.961) and that of the validation cohort was 0.850 (95% CI, 0.778-0.922). Decision curve analysis (DCA) indicated that the nomogram has outstanding clinical value. Conclusions This study developed a clinical radiomics model that uses radiomics features to identify PTB from CAP. This…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 195 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free