Objectives: Lung cancer has been widely characterized through radiomics and artificial intelligence (AI). This review aims to summarize the published studies of AI based on positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) radiomics in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Materials and methods: A comprehensive search of literature published between 2012 and 2022 was conducted on the PubMed database. There were no language or publication status restrictions on the search. About 127 articles in the search results were screened and gradually excluded according to the exclusion criteria. Finally, this review included 39 articles for analysis.

Results: Classification is conducted according to purposes and several studies were identified at each stage of disease:1) Cancer detection (n=8), 2) histology and stage of cancer (n=11), 3) metastases (n=6), 4) genotype (n=6), 5) treatment outcome and survival (n=8). There is a wide range of heterogeneity among studies due to differences in patient sources, evaluation criteria and workflow of radiomics. On the whole, most models show diagnostic performance comparable to or even better than experts, and the common problems are repeatability and clinical transformability.

Conclusion: AI-based PET/CT Radiomics play potential roles in NSCLC clinical management. However, there is still a long way to go before being translated into clinical application. Large-scale, multi-center, prospective research is the direction of future efforts, while we need to face the risk of repeatability of radiomics features and the limitation of access to large databases.

Objective: This study aimed to develop effective artificial intelligence (AI) diagnostic models based on CT images of pulmonary nodules only, on descriptional and quantitative clinical or image features, or on a combination of both to differentiate benign and malignant ground-glass nodules (GGNs) to assist in the determination of surgical intervention.

Methods: Our study included a total of 867 nodules (benign nodules: 112; malignant nodules: 755) with postoperative pathological diagnoses from two centers. For the diagnostic models to discriminate between benign and malignant GGNs, we adopted three different artificial intelligence (AI) approaches: a) an image-based deep learning approach to build a deep neural network (DNN); b) a clinical feature-based machine learning approach based on the clinical and image features of nodules; c) a fusion diagnostic model integrating the original images and the clinical and image features. The performance of the models was evaluated on an internal test dataset (the “Changzheng Dataset”) and an independent test dataset collected from an external institute (the “Longyan Dataset”). In addition, the performance of automatic diagnostic models was compared with that of manual evaluations by two radiologists on the ‘Longyan dataset’.

Results: The image-based deep learning model achieved an appealing diagnostic performance, yielding AUC values of 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62, 0.89) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.90), respectively, on both the Changzheng and Longyan datasets. The clinical feature-based machine learning model performed well on the Changzheng dataset (AUC, 0.80 [95% CI: 0.64, 0.96]), whereas it performed poorly on the Longyan dataset (AUC, 0.62 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.83]). The fusion diagnostic model achieved the best performance on both the Changzheng dataset (AUC, 0.82 [95% CI: 0.71-0.93]) and the Longyan dataset (AUC, 0.83 [95% CI: 0.70-0.96]), and it achieved a better specificity (0.69) than the radiologists (0.33-0.44) on the Longyan dataset.

Conclusion: The deep learning models, including both the image-based deep learning model and the fusion model, have the ability to assist radiologists in differentiating between benign and malignant nodules for the precise management of patients with GGNs.