| Literature DB >> 30255254 |
Jianxing Niu1, Shuaitong Zhang2,3, Shunchang Ma1, Jinfu Diao1, Wenjianlong Zhou1, Jie Tian2,3,4, Yali Zang5,6, Wang Jia7.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To predict cavernous sinus (CS) invasion by pituitary adenomas (PAs) pre-operatively using a radiomics method based on contrast-enhanced T1 (CE-T1) and T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging.Entities:
Keywords: Cavernous sinus; Neoplasm invasion; Nomogram; Pituitary adenomas; Support vector machine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30255254 PMCID: PMC6510860 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5725-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Fig. 1Flowchart illustrating the process of radiomics. I) Image segmentation was conducted on the axial, sagittal and coronal planes of contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR images and T2-weighted MR images. Note that internal carotid artery on the coronal planes was also contoured. II) Features were extracted from the tumour region. III) Analysis of the radiomics features and clinical data
Characteristics of patients and tumours (n = 194)
| Characteristic | Training Set | Test Set | Whole Set ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr, mean ± std) | 47.82 ± 12.46 | 46.22 ± 12.37 | 47.02 ± 12.41 | 0.559 |
| Gender (No.) | 0.727 | |||
| Male | 46 (47.42%) | 50 (51.55%) | 96 (49.48%) | |
| Female | 51 (52.58%) | 47 (48.45%) | 98 (50.52%) | |
| Tumour Volume (cm3, mean ± std) | 14.03 ± 16.87 | 11.59 ± 8.76 | 12.81 ± 13.46 | 0.378 |
| Knosp Grade (No.) | 0.213 | |||
| Grade 2 | 37 (38.14%) | 52 (53.61%) | 89 (45.88%) | |
| Grade 3 | 60 (61.86%) | 45 (46.39%) | 105 (54.12%) | |
| Haemorrhage (No.) | 0.830 | |||
| Yes | 12 (12.37%) | 13 (13.40%) | 25 (12.89%) | |
| No | 85 (87.63%) | 84 (86.60%) | 169 (87.11 %) | |
| Tumour Diameter (cm, mean ± std) | 3.27 ± 0.97 | 3.01 ± 0.83 | 3.14 ± 0.91 | 0.213 |
| Suprasellar Invasion (No.) | 0.378 | |||
| Yes | 64 (65.98%) | 55 (56.70%) | 119 (61.34%) | |
| No | 33 (34.02%) | 42 (43.30%) | 75 (38.66%) | |
| Periarterial Enhancement (No.) | 0.830 | |||
| Yes | 43 (44.33%) | 45 (46.39%) | 88 (45.36%) | |
| No | 54 (55.67%) | 52 (53.61%) | 106 (54.64%) | |
| ICV obliteration (No.) | 0.378 | |||
| Yes | 30 (30.93%) | 21 (21.65%) | 51 (26.29%) | |
| No | 67 (69.07%) | 76 (78.35%) | 143 (73.71%) |
P-values were corrected for multiple testing by controlling the false discovery rate of 5%
yr year, std standard deviation, ICV inferolateral venous compartment
The list of representative features selected
| MR Image | Selected features |
|---|---|
| CE-T1 MRI | Sphericity; Minimum_HL; ICA Wrapped Degree |
| T2 MRI | Sphericity |
| CE-T1&T2 MRI | Sphericity (CE-T1); Minimum_HL (CE-T1); ICA Wrapped Degree (CE-T1); Low Grey Level Run Emphasis_HH_135° (T2) |
ICA Wrapped Degree represented the degree of ICA wrapped by tumours
CE-T1MRI contrast-enhanced T1 weighted MR image, T2 MRI T2 weighted MR image, ICA internal carotid artery
Performance of clinico-radiological, CE-T1, T2, and CE-T1+T2 models, and nomogram
| Model | Performance | AUC (95% CI) | ACC | SEN | SPE | Cut-off | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinico-radiological | Training set | 0.846 (0.831–0.861) | 0.763 | 0.765 | 0.761 | 1.25E-9 | 0.472 |
| Test set | 0.828 (0.812–0.844) | 0.773 | 0.823 | 0.686 | 1.63E-8 | 0.472 | |
| CE-T1 | Training set | 0.852 (0.837–0.868) | 0.753 | 0.851 | 0.660 | 2.33E-9 | 0.266 |
| Test set | 0.826 (0.804–0.844) |
| 0.800 |
| 1.07E-7 | 0.266 | |
| T2 | Training set | 0.768 (0.748–0.787) | 0.711 | 0.809 | 0.620 | 5.71E-6 | -0.091 |
| Test set | 0.733 (0.712–0.754) | 0.680 | 0.629 | 0.710 | 1.46E-4 | -0.091 | |
| CE-T1+T2 | Training set | 0.869 (0.855–0.884) | 0.753 | 0.851 | 0.660 | 3.80E-10 | 0.134 |
| Test set | 0.803 (0.784–0.821) | 0.791 | 0.771 | 0.790 | 8.16E-7 | 0.134 | |
| Nomogram | Training set | 0.899 (0.887–0.911) | 0.814 | 0.936 | 0.700 | 1.31E-11 | -0.732 |
The best performance in the test cohort is indicated in bold font. The cutoff values were calculated using the xtile function in R
AUC area under the curve, ACC accuracy, SEN sensitivity, SPE specificity, CE-T1 contrast-enhanced T1 weighted MR image, T2 T2 weighted MR image
Fig. 2Performance of radiomics models based on CE-T1, T2, and CE-T1 and T2 images. The ROC curves (a) and boxplots (c) of the three models on the training set. The ROC curves (b) and boxplots (d) of the three models on the test set
Fig. 3Radiomics predictive model. This model was plotted to facilitate the comprehension. The model was built based on CE-T1 MR images using linear SVMs. The x, y and z axes represent the features of Sphericity, Minimum_HL_45°, and ICA wrapped degree, respectively. These three features were normalised to the range of -1 to 1. The grey plane represents the classifier surface. The points (pink squares and sky-blue asterisks) above the classifier surface were predicted as PAs with CS invasion, while the points (sky-blue solid points and pink asterisks) below the classifier surface were predicted as PAs without CS invasion. The pink squares represent the PAs with CS invasion that were predicted correctly; the sky-blue solid points represent the PAs without CS invasion that were predicted correctly. The PAs with CS invasion, which was predicted incorrectly are shown as pink asterisks; the PAs without CS invasion, which were predicted incorrectly are shown as sky-blue asterisks. The black circles represent the support vectors calculated in the SVM model
Univariate analysis of clinical characteristics of patients and tumours in the training set and test set
| Characteristic | Training Set | Test Set | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Invasion | Non-Invasion | Invasion | Non-Invasion | |||
| Age (yr, mean ± std) | 48.09 ± 13.57 | 47.58 ± 11.45 | 0.960 | 44.17 ± 13.03 | 47.37 ± 11.93 | 0.293 |
| Gender (No.) | 0.1146 | 0.986 | ||||
| Male | 18 (38.3%) | 28 (56.0%) | 18 (51.4%) | 32 (51.6%) | ||
| Female | 29 (61.7%) | 22 (44.0%) | 17 (48.6%) | 30 (48.4%) | ||
| Knosp Grade(No.) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||
| Grade 2 | 7 (14.9%) | 30 (60.0%) | 6 (17.1%) | 46 (74.2%) | ||
| Grade 3 | 40 (85.1%) | 20 (40.0%) | 29 (82.9%) | 16 (25.8%) | ||
| Tumour Volume | 13.79 ± 10.58 | 14.26 ± 21.26 | 0.960 | 14.10 ± 9.66 | 10.17 ± 7.94 | 0.053 |
| Haemorrhage (No.) | 0.064 | 0.051 | ||||
| Yes | 2 (4.3%) | 10 (20.0%) | 1 (2.9%) | 12 (19.4%) | ||
| No | 45 (95.7%) | 40 (80.0%) | 34 (97.1%) | 50 (80.6%) | ||
| Tumour Diameter | 3.27 ± 0.85 | 3.261.07 | 0.960 | 3.38 ± 0.92 | 2.81 ± 0.71 | 0.005 |
| Suprasellar Invasion (No.) | 0.700 | |||||
| Yes | 32 (68.1%) | 32 (64.0%) | 21 (60.0%) | 34 (54.8%) | ||
| No | 15 (31.9%) | 18 (36.0%) | 0.960 | 14 (40.0%) | 28(45.2%) | |
| Periarterial Enhancement (No.) | < 0.001 | 0.006 | ||||
| Yes | 10 (21.3%) | 33 (66.0%) | 9 (25.7%) | 36 (58.1%) | ||
| No | 37 (78.8%) | 17 (34.0%) | 26 (74.3%) | 26 (41.9%) | ||
| ICV obliteration (No.) | < 0.001 | 0.012 | ||||
| Yes | 23 (48.9%) | 7 (14.0%) | 13 (37.1%) | 8 (12.9%) | ||
| No | 24 (51.1%) | 43 (86.0%) | 22 (62.9%) | 54 (87.1%) | ||
P-values were corrected for multiple testing by controlling the false discovery rate of 5%
yr year, std standard deviation, ICV inferolateral venous compartment
Fig. 4a A radiomics nomogram incorporating the radiomics signature, Knosp grade, periarterial enhancement, and inferolateral venous compartment obliteration on the training set. b Calibration curve of the radiomics nomogram on the training set. c Calibration curve of the radiomics nomogram on the test set. Calibration curve presents the agreement between the predicted invasion probability and observed outcomes of invasion. The diagonal blue line represents an ideal evaluation, while the black and red lines represent the performance of the nomogram. Closer fit to the diagonal blue line indicates a better evaluation
Fig. 5Decision curve analysis for the clinico-radiological and radiomics nomogram. The decision curve showed that if the threshold probability was higher than 20%, then using the radiomics nomogram to predict CS invasion added more benefit than either using the clinic-radiological model, treat all patients, or treat no patients