Literature DB >> 23294985

Multi-kernel graph embedding for detection, Gleason grading of prostate cancer via MRI/MRS.

Pallavi Tiwari1, John Kurhanewicz, Anant Madabhushi.   

Abstract

Even though 1 in 6 men in the US, in their lifetime are expected to be diagnosed with prostate cancer (CaP), only 1 in 37 is expected to die on account of it. Consequently, among many men diagnosed with CaP, there has been a recent trend to resort to active surveillance (wait and watch) if diagnosed with a lower Gleason score on biopsy, as opposed to seeking immediate treatment. Some researchers have recently identified imaging markers for low and high grade CaP on multi-parametric (MP) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (such as T2 weighted MR imaging (T2w MRI) and MR spectroscopy (MRS)). In this paper, we present a novel computerized decision support system (DSS), called Semi Supervised Multi Kernel Graph Embedding (SeSMiK-GE), that quantitatively combines structural, and metabolic imaging data for distinguishing (a) benign versus cancerous, and (b) high- versus low-Gleason grade CaP regions from in vivo MP-MRI. A total of 29 1.5Tesla endorectal pre-operative in vivo MP MRI (T2w MRI, MRS) studies from patients undergoing radical prostatectomy were considered in this study. Ground truth for evaluation of the SeSMiK-GE classifier was obtained via annotation of disease extent on the pre-operative imaging by visually correlating the MRI to the ex vivo whole mount histologic specimens. The SeSMiK-GE framework comprises of three main modules: (1) multi-kernel learning, (2) semi-supervised learning, and (3) dimensionality reduction, which are leveraged for the construction of an integrated low dimensional representation of the different imaging and non-imaging MRI protocols. Hierarchical classifiers for diagnosis and Gleason grading of CaP are then constructed within this unified low dimensional representation. Step 1 of the hierarchical classifier employs a random forest classifier in conjunction with the SeSMiK-GE based data representation and a probabilistic pairwise Markov Random Field algorithm (which allows for imposition of local spatial constraints) to yield a voxel based classification of CaP presence. The CaP region of interest identified in Step 1 is then subsequently classified as either high or low Gleason grade CaP in Step 2. Comparing SeSMiK-GE with unimodal T2w MRI, MRS classifiers and a commonly used feature concatenation (COD) strategy, yielded areas (AUC) under the receiver operative curve (ROC) of (a) 0.89±0.09 (SeSMiK), 0.54±0.18 (T2w MRI), 0.61±0.20 (MRS), and 0.64±0.23 (COD) for distinguishing benign from CaP regions, and (b) 0.84±0.07 (SeSMiK),0.54±0.13 (MRI), 0.59±0.19 (MRS), and 0.62±0.18 (COD) for distinguishing high and low grade CaP using a leave one out cross-validation strategy, all evaluations being performed on a per voxel basis. Our results suggest that following further rigorous validation, SeSMiK-GE could be developed into a powerful diagnostic and prognostic tool for detection and grading of CaP in vivo and in helping to determine the appropriate treatment option. Identifying low grade disease in vivo might allow CaP patients to opt for active surveillance rather than immediately opt for aggressive therapy such as radical prostatectomy.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23294985      PMCID: PMC3708492          DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2012.10.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Image Anal        ISSN: 1361-8415            Impact factor:   8.545


  50 in total

1.  An introduction to kernel-based learning algorithms.

Authors:  K R Müller; S Mika; G Rätsch; K Tsuda; B Schölkopf
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Netw       Date:  2001

2.  Riemannian manifold learning.

Authors:  Tong Lin; Hongbin Zha
Journal:  IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 6.226

3.  A hierarchical spectral clustering and nonlinear dimensionality reduction scheme for detection of prostate cancer from magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS).

Authors:  Pallavi Tiwari; Mark Rosen; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  In vivo proton MR spectroscopy reveals altered metabolite content in malignant prostate tissue.

Authors:  A Heerschap; G J Jager; M van der Graaf; J O Barentsz; J J de la Rosette; G O Oosterhof; E T Ruijter; S H Ruijs
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1997 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.480

5.  Multimodal wavelet embedding representation for data combination (MaWERiC): integrating magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  P Tiwari; S Viswanath; J Kurhanewicz; A Sridhar; A Madabhushi
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 4.044

6.  Central gland and peripheral zone prostate tumors have significantly different quantitative imaging signatures on 3 Tesla endorectal, in vivo T2-weighted MR imagery.

Authors:  Satish E Viswanath; Nicholas B Bloch; Jonathan C Chappelow; Robert Toth; Neil M Rofsky; Elizabeth M Genega; Robert E Lenkinski; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Computer-assisted analysis of peripheral zone prostate lesions using T2-weighted and dynamic contrast enhanced T1-weighted MRI.

Authors:  Pieter C Vos; Thomas Hambrock; Jelle O Barenstz; Henkjan J Huisman
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-03-02       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Prostate depiction at endorectal MR spectroscopic imaging: investigation of a standardized evaluation system.

Authors:  Juyoung A Jung; Fergus V Coakley; Daniel B Vigneron; Mark G Swanson; Aliya Qayyum; Vivian Weinberg; Kirk D Jones; Peter R Carroll; John Kurhanewicz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Limited value of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasonography in the staging of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  F May; T Treumann; P Dettmar; R Hartung; J Breul
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with an elevated prostate-specific antigen level: role of endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging.

Authors:  Nick G Costouros; Fergus V Coakley; Antonio C Westphalen; Aliya Qayyum; Benjamin M Yeh; Bonnie N Joe; John Kurhanewicz
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  37 in total

1.  A Deep Learning-Based Approach for the Detection and Localization of Prostate Cancer in T2 Magnetic Resonance Images.

Authors:  Ruba Alkadi; Fatma Taher; Ayman El-Baz; Naoufel Werghi
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Computer-aided diagnosis of prostate cancer with MRI.

Authors:  Baowei Fei
Journal:  Curr Opin Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-09

3.  Computer-aided diagnosis prior to conventional interpretation of prostate mpMRI: an international multi-reader study.

Authors:  Matthew D Greer; Nathan Lay; Joanna H Shih; Tristan Barrett; Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt; Samuel Borofsky; Ismail Kabakus; Yan Mee Law; Jamie Marko; Haytham Shebel; Francesca V Mertan; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Ronald M Summers; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Quantitative identification of magnetic resonance imaging features of prostate cancer response following laser ablation and radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Geert J S Litjens; Henkjan J Huisman; Robin M Elliott; Natalie Nc Shih; Michael D Feldman; Satish Viswanath; Jurgen J Fütterer; Joyce G R Bomers; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-10-27

5.  Prostatome: a combined anatomical and disease based MRI atlas of the prostate.

Authors:  Mirabela Rusu; B Nicolas Bloch; Carl C Jaffe; Elizabeth M Genega; Robert E Lenkinski; Neil M Rofsky; Ernest Feleppa; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Semi-automatic classification of prostate cancer on multi-parametric MR imaging using a multi-channel 3D convolutional neural network.

Authors:  Nader Aldoj; Steffen Lukas; Marc Dewey; Tobias Penzkofer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-08-29       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Automated prostate cancer detection using T2-weighted and high-b-value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Jin Tae Kwak; Sheng Xu; Bradford J Wood; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto; Shijun Wang; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  High-risk prostate cancer-classification and therapy.

Authors:  Albert J Chang; Karen A Autio; Mack Roach; Howard I Scher
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 66.675

9.  Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Duc Fehr; Harini Veeraraghavan; Andreas Wibmer; Tatsuo Gondo; Kazuhiro Matsumoto; Herbert Alberto Vargas; Evis Sala; Hedvig Hricak; Joseph O Deasy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 10.  Computer-aided Detection of Prostate Cancer with MRI: Technology and Applications.

Authors:  Lizhi Liu; Zhiqiang Tian; Zhenfeng Zhang; Baowei Fei
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 3.173

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.