Literature DB >> 27781499

A quantitative study of shape descriptors from glioblastoma multiforme phenotypes for predicting survival outcome.

Ahmad Chaddad1,2, Christian Desrosiers1, Lama Hassan1,2, Camel Tanougast2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Predicting the survival outcome of patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is of key importance to clinicians for selecting the optimal course of treatment. The goal of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of geometric shape features, extracted from MR images, as a potential non-invasive way to characterize GBM tumours and predict the overall survival times of patients with GBM.
METHODS: The data of 40 patients with GBM were obtained from the Cancer Genome Atlas and Cancer Imaging Archive. The T1 weighted post-contrast and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery volumes of patients were co-registered and segmented into delineate regions corresponding to three GBM phenotypes: necrosis, active tumour and oedema/invasion. A set of two-dimensional shape features were then extracted slicewise from each phenotype region and combined over slices to describe the three-dimensional shape of these phenotypes. Thereafter, a Kruskal-Wallis test was employed to identify shape features with significantly different distributions across phenotypes. Moreover, a Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to find features strongly associated with GBM survival. Finally, a multivariate analysis based on the random forest model was used for predicting the survival group of patients with GBM.
RESULTS: Our analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test showed that all but one shape feature had statistically significant differences across phenotypes, with p-value < 0.05, following Holm-Bonferroni correction, justifying the analysis of GBM tumour shapes on a per-phenotype basis. Furthermore, the survival analysis based on the Kaplan-Meier estimator identified three features derived from necrotic regions (i.e. Eccentricity, Extent and Solidity) that were significantly correlated with overall survival (corrected p-value < 0.05; hazard ratios between 1.68 and 1.87). In the multivariate analysis, features from necrotic regions gave the highest accuracy in predicting the survival group of patients, with a mean area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 63.85%. Combining the features of all three phenotypes increased the mean AUC to 66.99%, suggesting that shape features from different phenotypes can be used in a synergic manner to predict GBM survival.
CONCLUSION: Results show that shape features, in particular those extracted from necrotic regions, can be used effectively to characterize GBM tumours and predict the overall survival of patients with GBM. Advances in knowledge: Simple volumetric features have been largely used to characterize the different phenotypes of a GBM tumour (i.e. active tumour, oedema and necrosis). This study extends previous work by considering a wide range of shape features, extracted in different phenotypes, for the prediction of survival in patients with GBM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27781499      PMCID: PMC5604924          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20160575

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  31 in total

1.  Scale to predict survival after surgery for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  John K Park; Tiffany Hodges; Leopold Arko; Michael Shen; Donna Dello Iacono; Adrian McNabb; Nancy Olsen Bailey; Teri Nguyen Kreisl; Fabio M Iwamoto; Joohee Sul; Sungyoung Auh; Grace E Park; Howard A Fine; Peter McL Black
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Radiomic analysis of multi-contrast brain MRI for the prediction of survival in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  Ahmad Chaddad; Christian Desrosiers; Matthew Toews
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2016-08

3.  Discrimination between metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme based on morphometric analysis of MR images.

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

4.  A multigene predictor of outcome in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Howard Colman; Li Zhang; Erik P Sulman; J Matthew McDonald; Nasrin Latif Shooshtari; Andreana Rivera; Sonya Popoff; Catherine L Nutt; David N Louis; J Gregory Cairncross; Mark R Gilbert; Heidi S Phillips; Minesh P Mehta; Arnab Chakravarti; Christopher E Pelloski; Krishna Bhat; Burt G Feuerstein; Robert B Jenkins; Ken Aldape
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2009-10-20       Impact factor: 12.300

5.  TCIA: An information resource to enable open science.

Authors:  Fred W Prior; Ken Clark; Paul Commean; John Freymann; Carl Jaffe; Justin Kirby; Stephen Moore; Kirk Smith; Lawrence Tarbox; Bruce Vendt; Guillermo Marquez
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2013

6.  MR imaging predictors of molecular profile and survival: multi-institutional study of the TCGA glioblastoma data set.

Authors:  David A Gutman; Lee A D Cooper; Scott N Hwang; Chad A Holder; Jingjing Gao; Tarun D Aurora; William D Dunn; Lisa Scarpace; Tom Mikkelsen; Rajan Jain; Max Wintermark; Manal Jilwan; Prashant Raghavan; Erich Huang; Robert J Clifford; Pattanasak Mongkolwat; Vladimir Kleper; John Freymann; Justin Kirby; Pascal O Zinn; Carlos S Moreno; Carl Jaffe; Rivka Colen; Daniel L Rubin; Joel Saltz; Adam Flanders; Daniel J Brat
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Evaluation of tumor-derived MRI-texture features for discrimination of molecular subtypes and prediction of 12-month survival status in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Dalu Yang; Ganesh Rao; Juan Martinez; Ashok Veeraraghavan; Arvind Rao
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Conditional probability of long-term survival in glioblastoma: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Derek R Johnson; Daniel J Ma; Jan C Buckner; Julie E Hammack
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Discrimination between glioblastoma multiforme and solitary metastasis using morphological features derived from the p:q tensor decomposition of diffusion tensor imaging.

Authors:  Guang Yang; Timothy L Jones; Thomas R Barrick; Franklyn A Howe
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2014-07-26       Impact factor: 4.044

10.  Brain tumor classification using the diffusion tensor image segmentation (D-SEG) technique.

Authors:  Timothy L Jones; Tiernan J Byrnes; Guang Yang; Franklyn A Howe; B Anthony Bell; Thomas R Barrick
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 12.300

View more
  10 in total

1.  Relapse patterns and radiation dose exposure in IDH wild-type glioblastoma at first radiographic recurrence following chemoradiation.

Authors:  Satoka Shidoh; Ricky R Savjani; Nicholas S Cho; Henrik E Ullman; Akifumi Hagiwara; Catalina Raymond; Albert Lai; Phionah L Nghiemphu; Linda M Liau; Whitney B Pope; Timothy F Cloughesy; Tania B Kaprealian; Noriko Salamon; Benjamin M Ellingson
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2022-09-02       Impact factor: 4.506

2.  Predicting survival time of lung cancer patients using radiomic analysis.

Authors:  Ahmad Chaddad; Christian Desrosiers; Matthew Toews; Bassam Abdulkarim
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-11-01

3.  Quantification of glioblastoma mass effect by lateral ventricle displacement.

Authors:  Tyler C Steed; Jeffrey M Treiber; Michael G Brandel; Kunal S Patel; Anders M Dale; Bob S Carter; Clark C Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Integration of Radiomic and Multi-omic Analyses Predicts Survival of Newly Diagnosed IDH1 Wild-Type Glioblastoma.

Authors:  Ahmad Chaddad; Paul Daniel; Siham Sabri; Christian Desrosiers; Bassam Abdulkarim
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-10       Impact factor: 6.639

5.  Introduction to radiomics and radiogenomics in neuro-oncology: implications and challenges.

Authors:  Niha Beig; Kaustav Bera; Pallavi Tiwari
Journal:  Neurooncol Adv       Date:  2021-01-23

6.  AI and High-Grade Glioma for Diagnosis and Outcome Prediction: Do All Machine Learning Models Perform Equally Well?

Authors:  Luca Pasquini; Antonio Napolitano; Martina Lucignani; Emanuela Tagliente; Francesco Dellepiane; Maria Camilla Rossi-Espagnet; Matteo Ritrovato; Antonello Vidiri; Veronica Villani; Giulio Ranazzi; Antonella Stoppacciaro; Andrea Romano; Alberto Di Napoli; Alessandro Bozzao
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  GPCR genes as a predictor of glioma severity and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Eun-A Ko; Tong Zhou
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 1.573

Review 8.  Information-Based Medicine in Glioma Patients: A Clinical Perspective.

Authors:  Joeky Tamba Senders; Maya Harary; Brittany Morgan Stopa; Patrick Staples; Marike Lianne Daphne Broekman; Timothy Richard Smith; William Brian Gormley; Omar Arnaout
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 2.238

9.  A Multi-parametric MRI-Based Radiomics Signature and a Practical ML Model for Stratifying Glioblastoma Patients Based on Survival Toward Precision Oncology.

Authors:  Alexander F I Osman
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 2.380

10.  18F-FDG-PET-based radiomics features to distinguish primary central nervous system lymphoma from glioblastoma.

Authors:  Ziren Kong; Chendan Jiang; Ruizhe Zhu; Shi Feng; Yaning Wang; Jiatong Li; Wenlin Chen; Penghao Liu; Dachun Zhao; Wenbin Ma; Yu Wang; Xin Cheng
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 4.881

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.