Objective

To compare radiomics and non-radiomics in predicting early recurrence (ER) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative surgery.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed and Embase databases. Studies with clear reference criteria were selected. Data were extracted and assessed for quality using the quality in prognosis studies tool (QUIPS) by two independent authors. All included radiomics studies underwent radiomics quality score (RQS) assessment. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) using random or fixed models with a 95%CI. Forest maps visualized the data, and summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curves with the area under the curve (AUC) were generated. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses explored sources of heterogeneity. We compared sensitivity, specificity, PLR, and NLR using the z-test and compared AUC values using the Delong test.

Results

Our meta-analysis included 10 studies comprising 1857 patients. For radiomics, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC of sROC, PLR and NLR were 0.84(95%CI: 0.78-0.89), 0.80(95%CI: 0.75-0.85), 0.89(95%CI: 0.86-0.91), 4.28(95%CI: 3.48-5.27) and 0.20(95%CI: 0.14-0.27), respectively, but with significant heterogeneity (I² = 60.78% for sensitivity, I² = 55.79% for specificity) and potential publication bias (P = 0.04). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC of sROC, PLR, NLR for non-radiomics were 0.75(95%CI:0.68-0.81), 0.78(95%CI:0.72-0.83), 0.83(95%CI: 0.80-0.86), 3.45(95%CI: 2.68-4.44) and 0.32(95%CI: 0.24-0.41), respectively. There was no significant heterogeneity in this group (I² = 0% for sensitivity, I² = 17.27% for specificity). Radiomics showed higher diagnostic accuracy (AUC: 0.89 vs. 0.83, P = 0.0456), higher sensitivity (0.84 vs. 0.75, P = 0.0385) and lower NLR (0.20 vs. 0.32, P = 0.0287).

Conclusion

The radiomics from preoperative MRI effectively predicts ER of HCC and has higher diagnostic accuracy than non-radiomics. Due to potential publication bias and suboptimal RQS scores in radiomics, these results should be interpreted cautiously.