Background: No evidence supports the choice of specific imaging filtering methodologies in radiomics. As the volume of the primary tumor is a well-recognized prognosticator, our purpose is to assess how filtering may impact the feature/volume dependency in computed tomography (CT) images of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and if such impact translates into differences in the performance of survival modeling. The role of lesion volume in model performances was also considered and discussed.Methods: Four-hundred seventeen CT images NSCLC patients were retrieved from the NSCLC-Radiomics public repository. Pre-processing and features extraction were implemented using Pyradiomics v3.0.1. Features showing high correlation with volume across original and filtered images were excluded.Cox PH with LASSO regularization and CatBoost models were built with and without volume, and their concordance (C-) indices were compared using Wilcoxon signed-ranked test. The Mann Whitney U test was used to assess model performances after stratification into two groups based on low-and high-volume lesions.Results: Radiomic models significantly outperformed models built on only clinical variables and volume.However, the exclusion/inclusion of volume did not generally alter the performances of radiomic models.Overall, performances were not substantially affected by the choice of either imaging filter (overall C-index 0.539-0.590 for Cox PH and 0.589-0.612 for CatBoost). The separation of patients with high-volume lesions resulted in significantly better performances in 2/10 and 7/10 cases for Cox PH and CatBoost models, respectively. Both low-and high-volume models performed significantly better with the inclusion of *, affiliation at the time of the study.
Radiomics uses high-dimensional sets of imaging features to predict biological characteristics of tumors and clinical outcomes. The choice of the algorithm used to analyze radiomic features and perform predictions has a high impact on the results, thus the identification of adequate machine learning methods for radiomic applications is crucial. In this study we aim to identify suitable approaches of analysis for radiomic-based binary predictions, according to sample size, outcome balancing and the features–outcome association strength. Simulated data were obtained reproducing the correlation structure among 168 radiomic features extracted from Computed Tomography images of 270 Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients and the associated to lymph node status. Performances of six classifiers combined with six feature selection (FS) methods were assessed on the simulated data using AUC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curves), sensitivity, and specificity. For all the FS methods and regardless of the association strength, the tree-based classifiers Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting obtained good performances (AUC ≥ 0.73), showing the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity. On small samples, performances were generally lower than in large–medium samples and with larger variations. FS methods generally did not improve performances. Thus, in radiomic studies, we suggest evaluating the choice of FS and classifiers, considering specific sample size, balancing, and association strength.
Radiomic analysis of 18F[FDG] PET/CT images might identify predictive imaging biomarkers, however, the reproducibility of this quantitative approach might depend on the methodology adopted for image analysis. This retrospective study investigates the impact of PET segmentation method and the selection of different target lesions on the radiomic analysis of baseline 18F[FDG] PET/CT images in a population of newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients. The whole tumor burden was segmented on PET images applying six methods: (1) 2.5 standardized uptake value (SUV) threshold; (2) 25% maximum SUV (SUVmax) threshold; (3) 42% SUVmax threshold; (4) 1.3∙liver uptake threshold; (5) intersection among 1, 2, 4; and (6) intersection among 1, 3, 4. For each method, total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV) and whole-body total lesion glycolysis (WTLG) were assessed, and their association with survival outcomes (progression-free survival PFS and overall survival OS) was investigated. Methods 1 and 2 provided stronger associations and were selected for the next steps. Radiomic analysis was then performed on two target lesions for each patient: the one with the highest SUV and the largest one. Fifty-three radiomic features were extracted, and radiomic scores to predict PFS and OS were obtained. Two proportional-hazard regression Cox models for PFS and OS were developed: (1) univariate radiomic models based on radiomic score; and (2) multivariable clinical–radiomic model including radiomic score and clinical/diagnostic parameters (IPI score, SUVmax, TMTV, WTLG, lesion volume). The models were created in the four scenarios obtained by varying the segmentation method and/or the target lesion; the models’ performances were compared (C-index). In all scenarios, the radiomic score was significantly associated with PFS and OS both at univariate and multivariable analysis (p < 0.001), in the latter case in association with the IPI score. When comparing the models’ performances in the four scenarios, the C-indexes agreed within the confidence interval. C-index ranges were 0.79–0.81 and 0.80–0.83 for PFS radiomic and clinical–radiomic models; 0.82–0.87 and 0.83–0.90 for OS radiomic and clinical–radiomic models. In conclusion, the selection of either between two PET segmentation methods and two target lesions for radiomic analysis did not significantly affect the performance of the prognostic models built on radiomic and clinical data of DLBCL patients. These results prompt further investigation of the proposed methodology on a validation dataset.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.