Ashirbani Saha1, Michael R Harowicz2, Weiyao Wang3, Maciej A Mazurowski2,4,5. 1. Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 302, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. ashirbani.saha@duke.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 302, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. 3. Department of Mathematics, Duke University, 120 Science Drive, 117 Physics Building, Durham, NC, 27708, USA. 4. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Duke University, Box 90291, Durham, NC, 27708, USA. 5. Duke University Medical Physics Graduate Program, 2424 Erwin Road, Suite 101, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether multivariate machine learning models of algorithmically assessed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features from breast cancer patients are associated with Oncotype DX (ODX) test recurrence scores. METHODS: A set of 261 female patients with invasive breast cancer, pre-operative dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance (DCE-MR) images and available ODX score at our institution was identified. A computer algorithm extracted a comprehensive set of 529 features from the DCE-MR images of these patients. The set of patients was divided into a training set and a test set. Using the training set we developed two machine learning-based models to discriminate (1) high ODX scores from intermediate and low ODX scores, and (2) high and intermediate ODX scores from low ODX scores. The performance of these models was evaluated on the independent test set. RESULTS: High against low and intermediate ODX scores were predicted by the multivariate model with AUC 0.77 (95% CI 0.56-0.98, p < 0.003). Low against intermediate and high ODX score was predicted with AUC 0.51 (95% CI 0.41-0.61, p = 0.75). CONCLUSION: A moderate association between imaging and ODX score was identified. The evaluated models currently do not warrant replacement of ODX with imaging alone.
PURPOSE: To determine whether multivariate machine learning models of algorithmically assessed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features from breast cancerpatients are associated with Oncotype DX (ODX) test recurrence scores. METHODS: A set of 261 female patients with invasive breast cancer, pre-operative dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance (DCE-MR) images and available ODX score at our institution was identified. A computer algorithm extracted a comprehensive set of 529 features from the DCE-MR images of these patients. The set of patients was divided into a training set and a test set. Using the training set we developed two machine learning-based models to discriminate (1) high ODX scores from intermediate and low ODX scores, and (2) high and intermediate ODX scores from low ODX scores. The performance of these models was evaluated on the independent test set. RESULTS: High against low and intermediate ODX scores were predicted by the multivariate model with AUC 0.77 (95% CI 0.56-0.98, p < 0.003). Low against intermediate and high ODX score was predicted with AUC 0.51 (95% CI 0.41-0.61, p = 0.75). CONCLUSION: A moderate association between imaging and ODX score was identified. The evaluated models currently do not warrant replacement of ODX with imaging alone.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer MRI; Feature selection; Imaging features; Logistic regression; Oncotype DX; Radiomics
Authors: A S Coates; E P Winer; A Goldhirsch; R D Gelber; M Gnant; M Piccart-Gebhart; B Thürlimann; H-J Senn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Ashirbani Saha; Lars J Grimm; Michael Harowicz; Sujata V Ghate; Connie Kim; Ruth Walsh; Maciej A Mazurowski Journal: Med Phys Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Nicholas J Tustison; Brian B Avants; Philip A Cook; Yuanjie Zheng; Alexander Egan; Paul A Yushkevich; James C Gee Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Michele M Gage; Martin Rosman; W Charles Mylander; Erica Giblin; Hyun-Seok Kim; Leslie Cope; Christopher Umbricht; Antonio C Wolff; Lorraine Tafra Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Ping Tang; Jianmin Wang; David G Hicks; Xi Wang; Linda Schiffhauer; Loralee McMahon; Qi Yang; Michelle Shayne; Alissa Huston; Kristin A Skinner; Jennifer Griggs; Gary Lyman Journal: Cancer Invest Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 2.176
Authors: Ben S Wittner; Dennis C Sgroi; Paula D Ryan; Tako J Bruinsma; Annuska M Glas; Anitha Male; Sonika Dahiya; Karleen Habin; Rene Bernards; Daniel A Haber; Laura J Van't Veer; Sridhar Ramaswamy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Molly E Klein; David J Dabbs; Yongli Shuai; Adam M Brufsky; Rachel Jankowitz; Shannon L Puhalla; Rohit Bhargava Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Hongxiao Li; Jigang Wang; Zaibo Li; Melad Dababneh; Fusheng Wang; Peng Zhao; Geoffrey H Smith; George Teodoro; Meijie Li; Jun Kong; Xiaoxian Li Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-14
Authors: Doris Leithner; Blanca Bernard-Davila; Danny F Martinez; Joao V Horvat; Maxine S Jochelson; Maria Adele Marino; Daly Avendano; R Elena Ochoa-Albiztegui; Elizabeth J Sutton; Elizabeth A Morris; Sunitha B Thakur; Katja Pinker Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.488