Medical imaging serves many roles in patient care and the drug approval process, including assessing treatment response and guiding treatment decisions. These roles often involve a quantitative imaging biomarker, an objectively measured characteristic of the underlying anatomic structure or biochemical process derived from medical images. Before a quantitative imaging biomarker is accepted for use in such roles, the imaging procedure to acquire it must undergo evaluation of its technical performance, which entails assessment of performance metrics such as repeatability and reproducibility of the quantitative imaging biomarker. Ideally, this evaluation will involve quantitative summaries of results from multiple studies to overcome limitations due to the typically small sample sizes of technical performance studies and/or to include a broader range of clinical settings and patient populations. This paper is a review of meta-analysis procedures for such an evaluation, including identification of suitable studies, statistical methodology to evaluate and summarize the performance metrics, and complete and transparent reporting of the results. This review addresses challenges typical of meta-analyses of technical performance, particularly small study sizes, which often causes violations of assumptions underlying standard meta-analysis techniques. Alternative approaches to address these difficulties are also presented; simulation studies indicate that they outperform standard techniques when some studies are small. The meta-analysis procedures presented are also applied to actual [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) test–retest repeatability data for illustrative purposes.

Purpose: Develop an integrated intra-site and inter-site radiomics-clinical-genomic marker of high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) outcomes and explore the biological basis of radiomics with respect to molecular signaling pathways and the tumor microenvironment (TME). Method: Seventy-five stage III-IV HGSOC patients from internal (N = 40) and external factors via the Cancer Imaging Archive (TCGA) (N = 35) with pre-operative contrast enhanced CT, attempted primary cytoreduction, at least two disease sites, and molecular analysis performed within TCGA were retrospectively analyzed. An intra-site and inter-site radiomics (cluDiss) measure was combined with clinical-genomic variables (iRCG) and compared against conventional (volume and number of sites) and average radiomics (N = 75) for prognosticating progression-free survival (PFS) and platinum resistance. Correlation with molecular signaling and TME derived using a single sample gene set enrichment that was measured. Results: The iRCG model had the best platinum resistance classification accuracy (AUROC of 0.78 [95% CI 0.77 to 0.80]). CluDiss was associated with PFS (HR 1.03 [95% CI: 1.01 to 1.05], p = 0.002), negatively correlated with Wnt signaling, and positively to immune TME. Conclusions: CluDiss and the iRCG prognosticated HGSOC outcomes better than conventional and average radiomic measures and could better stratify patient outcomes if validated on larger multi-center trials.

Purpose: Currently, guidelines for PET with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) interpretation for assessment of therapy response in oncology primarily involve visual evaluation of FDG-PET/CT scans. However, quantitative measurements of the metabolic activity in tumors may be even more useful in evaluating response to treatment. Guidelines based on such measurements, including the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Criteria and PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors, have been proposed. However, more rigorous analysis of response criteria based on FDG-PET measurements is needed to adopt regular use in practice. Experimental Design: Well-defined boundaries of repeatability and reproducibility of quantitative measurements to discriminate noise from true signal changes are a needed initial step. An extension of the meta-analysis from de Langen and colleagues (2012) of the test–retest repeatability of quantitative FDG-PET measurements, including mean, maximum, and peak standardized uptake values (SUVmax, SUVmean, and SUVpeak, respectively), was performed. Data from 11 studies in the literature were used to estimate the relationship between the variance in test–retest measurements with uptake level and various study-level, patient-level, and lesion-level characteristics. Results: Test–retest repeatability of percentage fluctuations for all three types of SUV measurement (max, mean, and peak) improved with higher FDG uptake levels. Repeatability in all three SUV measurements varied for different lesion locations. Worse repeatability in SUVmean was also associated with higher tumor volumes. Conclusions: On the basis of these results, recommendations regarding SUV measurements for assessing minimal detectable changes based on repeatability and reproducibility are proposed. These should be applied to differentiate between response categories for a future set of FDG-PET–based criteria that assess clinically significant changes in tumor response.