J Uthoff1, F A De Stefano2, K Panzer3, B W Darbro3, T S Sato2, R Khanna4, D E Quelle5, D K Meyerholz6, J Weimer7, J C Sieren8. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America. 3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America. 4. Department of Pharmacology, University of Arizona, Arizona, United States of America. 5. Department of Pharmacology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America. 6. Department of Pathology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America. 7. Pediatric and Rare Disease Group, Sanford Research, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, United States of America. 8. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America. Electronic address: jessica-sieren@uiowa.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study explores whether objective, quantitative radiomic biomarkers derived from magnetic resonance (MR), positron emission tomography (PET), and computed tomography (CT) may be useful in reliably distinguishing malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) from benign plexiform neurofibromas (PN). METHODS: A registration and segmentation pipeline was established using a cohort of NF1 patients with histopathological diagnosis of PN or MPNST, and medical imaging of the PN including MR and PET-CT. The corrected MR datasets were registered to the corresponding PET-CT via landmark-based registration. PET standard-uptake value (SUV) thresholds were used to guide segmentation of volumes of interest: MPNST-associated PET-hot regions (SUV≥3.5) and PN-associated PET-elevated regions (2.0<SUV<3.5). Quantitative imaging features were extracted from the MR, PET, and CT data and compared for statistical differences. Intensity histogram features included (mean, media, maximum, variance, full width at half maximum, entropy, kurtosis, and skewness), while image texture was quantified using Law's texture energy measures, grey-level co-occurrence matrices, and neighborhood grey-tone difference matrices. RESULTS: For each of the 20 NF1 subjects, a total of 320 features were extracted from the image data. Feature reduction and statistical testing identified 9 independent radiomic biomarkers from the MR data (4 intensity and 5 texture) and 4 PET (2 intensity and 2 texture) were different between the PET-hot versus PET-elevated volumes of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests imaging features can be used to distinguish malignancy in NF1-realted tumors, which could improve MPNST risk assessment and positively impact clinical management of NF1 patients.
BACKGROUND: This study explores whether objective, quantitative radiomic biomarkers derived from magnetic resonance (MR), positron emission tomography (PET), and computed tomography (CT) may be useful in reliably distinguishing malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) from benign plexiform neurofibromas (PN). METHODS: A registration and segmentation pipeline was established using a cohort of NF1patients with histopathological diagnosis of PN or MPNST, and medical imaging of the PN including MR and PET-CT. The corrected MR datasets were registered to the corresponding PET-CT via landmark-based registration. PET standard-uptake value (SUV) thresholds were used to guide segmentation of volumes of interest: MPNST-associated PET-hot regions (SUV≥3.5) and PN-associated PET-elevated regions (2.0<SUV<3.5). Quantitative imaging features were extracted from the MR, PET, and CT data and compared for statistical differences. Intensity histogram features included (mean, media, maximum, variance, full width at half maximum, entropy, kurtosis, and skewness), while image texture was quantified using Law's texture energy measures, grey-level co-occurrence matrices, and neighborhood grey-tone difference matrices. RESULTS: For each of the 20 NF1 subjects, a total of 320 features were extracted from the image data. Feature reduction and statistical testing identified 9 independent radiomic biomarkers from the MR data (4 intensity and 5 texture) and 4 PET (2 intensity and 2 texture) were different between the PET-hot versus PET-elevated volumes of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests imaging features can be used to distinguish malignancy in NF1-realted tumors, which could improve MPNST risk assessment and positively impact clinical management of NF1patients.
Authors: Terry S Yoo; Michael J Ackerman; William E Lorensen; Will Schroeder; Vikram Chalana; Stephen Aylward; Dimitris Metaxas; Ross Whitaker Journal: Stud Health Technol Inform Date: 2002
Authors: Victoria S Warbey; Rosalie E Ferner; Joel T Dunn; Eduardo Calonje; Michael J O'Doherty Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2009-01-14 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Matthias R Benz; Johannes Czernin; Sarah M Dry; William D Tap; Martin S Allen-Auerbach; David Elashoff; Michael E Phelps; Wolfgang A Weber; Fritz C Eilber Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Edward J Somer; Nigel A Benatar; Michael J O'Doherty; Mike A Smith; Paul K Marsden Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2007-11-12 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Akihiko Matsumine; K Kusuzaki; T Nakamura; S Nakazora; R Niimi; T Matsubara; K Uchida; T Murata; I Kudawara; T Ueda; N Naka; N Araki; M Maeda; A Uchida Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2008-12-20 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Wenli Cai; Ara Kassarjian; Miriam A Bredella; Gordon J Harris; Hiroyuki Yoshida; Victor F Mautner; Ralph Wenzel; Scott R Plotkin Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Lucia Baratto; K Elizabeth Hawk; Lisa States; Jing Qi; Sergios Gatidis; Louise Kiru; Heike E Daldrup-Link Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Michael Zhang; Elizabeth Tong; Sam Wong; Forrest Hamrick; Maryam Mohammadzadeh; Vaishnavi Rao; Courtney Pendleton; Brandon W Smith; Nicholas F Hug; Sandip Biswal; Jayne Seekins; Sandy Napel; Robert J Spinner; Mark A Mahan; Kristen W Yeom; Thomas J Wilson Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Inka Ristow; Frederic Madesta; Lennart Well; Farzad Shenas; Felicia Wright; Isabel Molwitz; Said Farschtschi; Peter Bannas; Gerhard Adam; Victor F Mautner; René Werner; Johannes Salamon Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-10-03 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Shivani Ahlawat; K Ina Ly; Laura M Fayad; Michael J Fisher; Andrés J Lessing; Dale J Berg; Johannes M Salamon; Victor-Felix Mautner; Dusica Babovic-Vuksanovic; Eva Dombi; Gordon Harris; Scott R Plotkin; Jaishri Blakeley Journal: Neurology Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 11.800
Authors: Johanna Uthoff; Jared Larson; Takashi S Sato; Emily Hammond; Kimberly E Schroeder; Frank Rohret; Christopher S Rogers; Dawn E Quelle; Benjamin W Darbro; Rajesh Khanna; Jill M Weimer; David K Meyerholz; Jessica C Sieren Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-03-19 Impact factor: 4.996