PURPOSE: Differentiation of glioblastomas from metastases is clinical important, but may be difficult even for expert observers. To investigate the contribution of machine learning algorithms in the differentiation of glioblastomas multiforme (GB) from metastases, we developed and tested a pattern recognition system based on 3T magnetic resonance (MR) data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single and multi-voxel proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) and dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI scans were performed on 49 patients with solitary brain tumors (35 glioblastoma multiforme and 14 metastases). Metabolic (NAA/Cr, Cho/Cr, (Lip [Formula: see text] Lac)/Cr) and perfusion (rCBV) parameters were measured in both intratumoral and peritumoral regions. The statistical significance of these parameters was evaluated. For the classification procedure, three datasets were created to find the optimum combination of parameters that provides maximum differentiation. Three machine learning methods were utilized: Naïve-Bayes, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and [Formula: see text]-nearest neighbor (KNN). The discrimination ability of each classifier was evaluated with quantitative performance metrics. RESULTS: Glioblastoma and metastases were differentiable only in the peritumoral region of these lesions ([Formula: see text]). SVM achieved the highest overall performance (accuracy 98%) for both the intratumoral and peritumoral areas. Naïve-Bayes and KNN presented greater variations in performance. The proper selection of datasets plays a very significant role as they are closely correlated to the underlying pathophysiology. CONCLUSION: The application of pattern recognition techniques using 3T MR-based perfusion and metabolic features may provide incremental diagnostic value in the differentiation of common intraaxial brain tumors, such as glioblastoma versus metastasis.
PURPOSE: Differentiation of glioblastomas from metastases is clinical important, but may be difficult even for expert observers. To investigate the contribution of machine learning algorithms in the differentiation of glioblastomas multiforme (GB) from metastases, we developed and tested a pattern recognition system based on 3T magnetic resonance (MR) data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single and multi-voxel proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) and dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI scans were performed on 49 patients with solitary brain tumors (35 glioblastoma multiforme and 14 metastases). Metabolic (NAA/Cr, Cho/Cr, (Lip [Formula: see text] Lac)/Cr) and perfusion (rCBV) parameters were measured in both intratumoral and peritumoral regions. The statistical significance of these parameters was evaluated. For the classification procedure, three datasets were created to find the optimum combination of parameters that provides maximum differentiation. Three machine learning methods were utilized: Naïve-Bayes, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and [Formula: see text]-nearest neighbor (KNN). The discrimination ability of each classifier was evaluated with quantitative performance metrics. RESULTS:Glioblastoma and metastases were differentiable only in the peritumoral region of these lesions ([Formula: see text]). SVM achieved the highest overall performance (accuracy 98%) for both the intratumoral and peritumoral areas. Naïve-Bayes and KNN presented greater variations in performance. The proper selection of datasets plays a very significant role as they are closely correlated to the underlying pathophysiology. CONCLUSION: The application of pattern recognition techniques using 3T MR-based perfusion and metabolic features may provide incremental diagnostic value in the differentiation of common intraaxial brain tumors, such as glioblastoma versus metastasis.
Authors: L Blanchet; P W T Krooshof; G J Postma; A J Idema; B Goraj; A Heerschap; L M C Buydens Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Riyadh N Al-Okaili; Jaroslaw Krejza; John H Woo; Ronald L Wolf; Donald M O'Rourke; Kevin D Judy; Harish Poptani; Elias R Melhem Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kirstie S Opstad; Mary M Murphy; Peter R Wilkins; B Anthony Bell; John R Griffiths; Franklyn A Howe Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Juan M García-Gómez; Jan Luts; Margarida Julià-Sapé; Patrick Krooshof; Salvador Tortajada; Javier Vicente Robledo; Willem Melssen; Elies Fuster-García; Iván Olier; Geert Postma; Daniel Monleón; Angel Moreno-Torres; Jesús Pujol; Ana-Paula Candiota; M Carmen Martínez-Bisbal; Johan Suykens; Lutgarde Buydens; Bernardo Celda; Sabine Van Huffel; Carles Arús; Montserrat Robles Journal: MAGMA Date: 2008-11-07 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Jean-Michel Lemée; Anne Clavreul; Marc Aubry; Emmanuelle Com; Marie de Tayrac; Pierre-Antoine Eliat; Cécile Henry; Audrey Rousseau; Jean Mosser; Philippe Menei Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Nathaniel C Swinburne; Javin Schefflein; Yu Sakai; Eric Karl Oermann; Joseph J Titano; Iris Chen; Sayedhedayatollah Tadayon; Amit Aggarwal; Amish Doshi; Kambiz Nael Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2019-06