Wookjin Choi1, Jung Hun Oh1, Sadegh Riyahi1, Chia-Ju Liu2, Feng Jiang3, Wengen Chen4, Charles White4, Andreas Rimner5, James G Mechalakos1, Joseph O Deasy1, Wei Lu1. 1. Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA. 4. Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop a radiomics prediction model to improve pulmonary nodule (PN) classification in low-dose CT. To compare the model with the American College of Radiology (ACR) Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) for early detection of lung cancer. METHODS: We examined a set of 72 PNs (31 benign and 41 malignant) from the Lung Image Database Consortium image collection (LIDC-IDRI). One hundred three CT radiomic features were extracted from each PN. Before the model building process, distinctive features were identified using a hierarchical clustering method. We then constructed a prediction model by using a support vector machine (SVM) classifier coupled with a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). A tenfold cross-validation (CV) was repeated ten times (10 × 10-fold CV) to evaluate the accuracy of the SVM-LASSO model. Finally, the best model from the 10 × 10-fold CV was further evaluated using 20 × 5- and 50 × 2-fold CVs. RESULTS: The best SVM-LASSO model consisted of only two features: the bounding box anterior-posterior dimension (BB_AP) and the standard deviation of inverse difference moment (SD_IDM). The BB_AP measured the extension of a PN in the anterior-posterior direction and was highly correlated (r = 0.94) with the PN size. The SD_IDM was a texture feature that measured the directional variation of the local homogeneity feature IDM. Univariate analysis showed that both features were statistically significant and discriminative (P = 0.00013 and 0.000038, respectively). PNs with larger BB_AP or smaller SD_IDM were more likely malignant. The 10 × 10-fold CV of the best SVM model using the two features achieved an accuracy of 84.6% and 0.89 AUC. By comparison, Lung-RADS achieved an accuracy of 72.2% and 0.77 AUC using four features (size, type, calcification, and spiculation). The prediction improvement of SVM-LASSO comparing to Lung-RADS was statistically significant (McNemar's test P = 0.026). Lung-RADS misclassified 19 cases because it was mainly based on PN size, whereas the SVM-LASSO model correctly classified 10 of these cases by combining a size (BB_AP) feature and a texture (SD_IDM) feature. The performance of the SVM-LASSO model was stable when leaving more patients out with five- and twofold CVs (accuracy 84.1% and 81.6%, respectively). CONCLUSION: We developed an SVM-LASSO model to predict malignancy of PNs with two CT radiomic features. We demonstrated that the model achieved an accuracy of 84.6%, which was 12.4% higher than Lung-RADS.
PURPOSE: To develop a radiomics prediction model to improve pulmonary nodule (PN) classification in low-dose CT. To compare the model with the American College of Radiology (ACR) Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) for early detection of lung cancer. METHODS: We examined a set of 72 PNs (31 benign and 41 malignant) from the Lung Image Database Consortium image collection (LIDC-IDRI). One hundred three CT radiomic features were extracted from each PN. Before the model building process, distinctive features were identified using a hierarchical clustering method. We then constructed a prediction model by using a support vector machine (SVM) classifier coupled with a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). A tenfold cross-validation (CV) was repeated ten times (10 × 10-fold CV) to evaluate the accuracy of the SVM-LASSO model. Finally, the best model from the 10 × 10-fold CV was further evaluated using 20 × 5- and 50 × 2-fold CVs. RESULTS: The best SVM-LASSO model consisted of only two features: the bounding box anterior-posterior dimension (BB_AP) and the standard deviation of inverse difference moment (SD_IDM). The BB_AP measured the extension of a PN in the anterior-posterior direction and was highly correlated (r = 0.94) with the PN size. The SD_IDM was a texture feature that measured the directional variation of the local homogeneity feature IDM. Univariate analysis showed that both features were statistically significant and discriminative (P = 0.00013 and 0.000038, respectively). PNs with larger BB_AP or smaller SD_IDM were more likely malignant. The 10 × 10-fold CV of the best SVM model using the two features achieved an accuracy of 84.6% and 0.89 AUC. By comparison, Lung-RADS achieved an accuracy of 72.2% and 0.77 AUC using four features (size, type, calcification, and spiculation). The prediction improvement of SVM-LASSO comparing to Lung-RADS was statistically significant (McNemar's test P = 0.026). Lung-RADS misclassified 19 cases because it was mainly based on PN size, whereas the SVM-LASSO model correctly classified 10 of these cases by combining a size (BB_AP) feature and a texture (SD_IDM) feature. The performance of the SVM-LASSO model was stable when leaving more patients out with five- and twofold CVs (accuracy 84.1% and 81.6%, respectively). CONCLUSION: We developed an SVM-LASSO model to predict malignancy of PNs with two CT radiomic features. We demonstrated that the model achieved an accuracy of 84.6%, which was 12.4% higher than Lung-RADS.
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Sarah DeMello; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Brenda Brewer; Timothy R Church; Kathy L Clingan; Fenghai Duan; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine A Gatsonis; David S Gierada; Amanda Jain; Gordon C Jones; Irene Mahon; Pamela M Marcus; Joshua M Rathmell; JoRean Sicks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Yoganand Balagurunathan; Yuhua Gu; Hua Wang; Virendra Kumar; Olya Grove; Sam Hawkins; Jongphil Kim; Dmitry B Goldgof; Lawrence O Hall; Robert A Gatenby; Robert J Gillies Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 4.243
Authors: Brady J McKee; Shawn M Regis; Andrea B McKee; Sebastian Flacke; Christoph Wald Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Fabien Maldonado; Cyril Varghese; Srinivasan Rajagopalan; Fenghai Duan; Aneri B Balar; Dhairya A Lakhani; Sanja L Antic; Pierre P Massion; Tucker F Johnson; Ronald A Karwoski; Richard A Robb; Brian J Bartholmai; Tobias Peikert Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Susan Fernandes; Gareth Williams; Elvira Williams; Katjana Ehrlich; James Stone; Neil Finlayson; Mark Bradley; Robert R Thomson; Ahsan R Akram; Kevin Dhaliwal Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Wookjin Choi; Saad Nadeem; Sadegh R Alam; Joseph O Deasy; Allen Tannenbaum; Wei Lu Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed Date: 2020-11-13 Impact factor: 5.428