Response-to-repeatability of quantitative imaging features for longitudinal response assessment.

Quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are often selected and ranked based on their repeatability performance. In the context of treatment response assessment, however, one must also consider how sensitive a QIB is to measuring changes in the tumour. This work introduces response-to-repeatability ratio (R/R), which weighs the ability of a QIB to detect significant changes with respect to its measurement repeatability and applies it to the case of PET texture features. R/R is evaluated as the proportion of measurable changes from baseline to follow-up for each candidate QIB. We analyse 47 texture features extracted from lesions in bone-metastatic prostate cancer patients who received double baseline and/or baseline to treatment follow-up 18F-NaF PET/CT scans. R/R evaluates the proportion of follow-up changes outside of the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) defined by test-retest values. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV) are calculated for each feature. Relationship between ICC and R/R are evaluated with the Spearman's correlation coefficient. R/R varied significantly across texture features: 41/47 (87%) features demonstrated R/R  >  5%; 21/47 (45%) features demonstrated R/R  >  10%, and 11/47 (23%) features demonstrated R/R  >  20%. LOA of features ranged from [0.998, 1.001] to [0.22, 4.86]. Repeatability alone did not qualify a feature for its efficacy at detecting measurable change at follow-up, as shown by weak correlations between R/R and both CV and ICC (ρ  =  0.23 and ρ  =  0.40, respectively). Three features demonstrated excellent ICC (ICC  >  0.75) and R/R greater than that of SUVmax (R/R  =  41.8%): skewness (ICC  =  0.92, R/R  =  75.4%), kurtosis (ICC  =  0.88, R/R  =  47.0%) and diagonal moment (ICC  =  0.88, R/R  =  45.5%). R/R characterizes the sensitivity of candidate QIBs to detect measurable changes at follow-up. R/R supplements existing precision performance metrics (e.g. CV, ICC, and LOA) as an index to assess the utility of QIBs for response assessment.