Hie Bum Suh1, Yoon Seong Choi2, Sohi Bae1, Sung Soo Ahn1, Jong Hee Chang3, Seok-Gu Kang3, Eui Hyun Kim3, Se Hoon Kim4, Seung-Koo Lee1. 1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, College of Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, College of Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, Korea. yoonseong.choi07@gmail.com. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Pathology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance (MR) radiomics-based machine-learning algorithms in differentiating primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) from non-necrotic atypical glioblastoma (GBM). METHODS: Seventy-seven patients (54 individuals with PCNSL and 23 with non-necrotic atypical GBM), diagnosed from January 2009 to April 2017, were enrolled in this retrospective study. A total of 6,366 radiomics features, including shape, volume, first-order, texture, and wavelet-transformed features, were extracted from multi-parametric (post-contrast T1- and T2-weighted, and fluid attenuation inversion recovery images) and multiregional (enhanced and non-enhanced) tumour volumes. These features were subjected to recursive feature elimination and random forest (RF) analysis with nested cross-validation. The diagnostic abilities of a radiomics machine-learning classifier, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and three readers, who independently classified the tumours based on conventional MR sequences, were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Areas under the ROC curves (AUC) of the radiomics classifier, ADC value, and the radiologists were compared. RESULTS: The mean AUC of the radiomics classifier was 0.921 (95 % CI 0.825-0.990). The AUCs of the three readers and ADC were 0.707 (95 % CI 0.622-0.793), 0.759 (95 %CI 0.656-0.861), 0.695 (95 % CI 0.590-0.800) and 0.684 (95 % CI0.560-0.809), respectively. The AUC of the radiomics-based classifier was significantly higher than those of the three readers and ADC (p< 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Large-scale radiomics with a machine-learning algorithm can be useful for differentiating PCNSL from atypical GBM, and yields a better diagnostic performance than human radiologists and ADC values. KEY POINTS: • Machine-learning algorithm radiomics can help to differentiate primary central PCNSL from GBM. • This approach yields a higher diagnostic accuracy than visual analysis by radiologists. • Radiomics can strengthen radiologists' diagnostic decisions whenever conventional MRI sequences are available.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance (MR) radiomics-based machine-learning algorithms in differentiating primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) from non-necrotic atypical glioblastoma (GBM). METHODS: Seventy-seven patients (54 individuals with PCNSL and 23 with non-necrotic atypical GBM), diagnosed from January 2009 to April 2017, were enrolled in this retrospective study. A total of 6,366 radiomics features, including shape, volume, first-order, texture, and wavelet-transformed features, were extracted from multi-parametric (post-contrast T1- and T2-weighted, and fluid attenuation inversion recovery images) and multiregional (enhanced and non-enhanced) tumour volumes. These features were subjected to recursive feature elimination and random forest (RF) analysis with nested cross-validation. The diagnostic abilities of a radiomics machine-learning classifier, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and three readers, who independently classified the tumours based on conventional MR sequences, were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Areas under the ROC curves (AUC) of the radiomics classifier, ADC value, and the radiologists were compared. RESULTS: The mean AUC of the radiomics classifier was 0.921 (95 % CI 0.825-0.990). The AUCs of the three readers and ADC were 0.707 (95 % CI 0.622-0.793), 0.759 (95 %CI 0.656-0.861), 0.695 (95 % CI 0.590-0.800) and 0.684 (95 % CI0.560-0.809), respectively. The AUC of the radiomics-based classifier was significantly higher than those of the three readers and ADC (p< 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Large-scale radiomics with a machine-learning algorithm can be useful for differentiating PCNSL from atypical GBM, and yields a better diagnostic performance than human radiologists and ADC values. KEY POINTS: • Machine-learning algorithm radiomics can help to differentiate primary central PCNSL from GBM. • This approach yields a higher diagnostic accuracy than visual analysis by radiologists. • Radiomics can strengthen radiologists' diagnostic decisions whenever conventional MRI sequences are available.
Entities:
Keywords:
Glioblastoma; Lymphoma; Machine-learning; Magnetic resonance imaging; Radiomics
Authors: Philipp Kickingereder; Sina Burth; Antje Wick; Michael Götz; Oliver Eidel; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Klaus H Maier-Hein; Wolfgang Wick; Martin Bendszus; Alexander Radbruch; David Bonekamp Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 11.105
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: Joost J M van Griethuysen; Andriy Fedorov; Chintan Parmar; Ahmed Hosny; Nicole Aucoin; Vivek Narayan; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin; Steve Pieper; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Russell T Shinohara; Elizabeth M Sweeney; Jeff Goldsmith; Navid Shiee; Farrah J Mateen; Peter A Calabresi; Samson Jarso; Dzung L Pham; Daniel S Reich; Ciprian M Crainiceanu Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2014-08-15 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Ji Eun Park; Donghyun Kim; Ho Sung Kim; Seo Young Park; Jung Youn Kim; Se Jin Cho; Jae Ho Shin; Jeong Hoon Kim Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jeffrey D Rudie; Andreas M Rauschecker; R Nick Bryan; Christos Davatzikos; Suyash Mohan Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 11.105