Evan D H Gates1,2, Jonathan S Lin1,3,4, Jeffrey S Weinberg5, Jackson Hamilton6,7, Sujit S Prabhu5, John D Hazle1, Gregory N Fuller8, Veera Baladandayuthapani9, David Fuentes1, Dawid Schellingerhout6,10. 1. Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (UT MDACC), Houston, Texas. 2. UT MDACC UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, Texas. 3. Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 4. Department of Bioengineering, Rice University, Houston, Texas. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas. 6. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas. 7. Radiology Partners, Houston, Texas. 8. Department of Pathology, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas. 9. Department of Biostatistics, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas. 10. Department of Cancer Systems Imaging, UT MDACC, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Undersampling of gliomas at first biopsy is a major clinical problem, as accurate grading determines all subsequent treatment. We submit a technological solution to reduce the problem of undersampling by estimating a marker of tumor proliferation (Ki-67) using MR imaging data as inputs, against a stereotactic histopathology gold standard. METHODS: MR imaging was performed with anatomic, diffusion, permeability, and perfusion sequences, in untreated glioma patients in a prospective clinical trial. Stereotactic biopsies were harvested from each patient immediately prior to surgical resection. For each biopsy, an imaging description (23 parameters) was developed, and the Ki-67 index was recorded. Machine learning models were built to estimate Ki-67 from imaging inputs, and cross validation was undertaken to determine the error in estimates. The best model was used to generate graphical maps of Ki-67 estimates across the whole brain. RESULTS: Fifty-two image-guided biopsies were collected from 23 evaluable patients. The random forest algorithm best modeled Ki-67 with 4 imaging inputs (T2-weighted, fractional anisotropy, cerebral blood flow, Ktrans). It predicted the Ki-67 expression levels with a root mean square (RMS) error of 3.5% (R2 = 0.75). A less accurate predictive result (RMS error 5.4%, R2 = 0.50) was found using conventional imaging only. CONCLUSION: Ki-67 can be predicted to clinically useful accuracies using clinical imaging data. Advanced imaging (diffusion, perfusion, and permeability) improves predictive accuracy over conventional imaging alone. Ki-67 predictions, displayed as graphical maps, could be used to guide biopsy, resection, and/or radiation in the care of glioma patients.
BACKGROUND: Undersampling of gliomas at first biopsy is a major clinical problem, as accurate grading determines all subsequent treatment. We submit a technological solution to reduce the problem of undersampling by estimating a marker of tumor proliferation (Ki-67) using MR imaging data as inputs, against a stereotactic histopathology gold standard. METHODS: MR imaging was performed with anatomic, diffusion, permeability, and perfusion sequences, in untreated gliomapatients in a prospective clinical trial. Stereotactic biopsies were harvested from each patient immediately prior to surgical resection. For each biopsy, an imaging description (23 parameters) was developed, and the Ki-67 index was recorded. Machine learning models were built to estimate Ki-67 from imaging inputs, and cross validation was undertaken to determine the error in estimates. The best model was used to generate graphical maps of Ki-67 estimates across the whole brain. RESULTS: Fifty-two image-guided biopsies were collected from 23 evaluable patients. The random forest algorithm best modeled Ki-67 with 4 imaging inputs (T2-weighted, fractional anisotropy, cerebral blood flow, Ktrans). It predicted the Ki-67 expression levels with a root mean square (RMS) error of 3.5% (R2 = 0.75). A less accurate predictive result (RMS error 5.4%, R2 = 0.50) was found using conventional imaging only. CONCLUSION: Ki-67 can be predicted to clinically useful accuracies using clinical imaging data. Advanced imaging (diffusion, perfusion, and permeability) improves predictive accuracy over conventional imaging alone. Ki-67 predictions, displayed as graphical maps, could be used to guide biopsy, resection, and/or radiation in the care of gliomapatients.
Authors: Christopher R Durst; Prashant Raghavan; Mark E Shaffrey; David Schiff; M Beatriz Lopes; Jason P Sheehan; Nicholas J Tustison; James T Patrie; Wenjun Xin; W Jeff Elias; Kenneth C Liu; Greg A Helm; A Cupino; Max Wintermark Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2013-12-15 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Ramon F Barajas; Joanna J Phillips; Rupa Parvataneni; Annette Molinaro; Emma Essock-Burns; Gabriela Bourne; Andrew T Parsa; Manish K Aghi; Michael W McDermott; Mitchel S Berger; Soonmee Cha; Susan M Chang; Sarah J Nelson Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Hamed Akbari; Luke Macyszyn; Xiao Da; Michel Bilello; Ronald L Wolf; Maria Martinez-Lage; George Biros; Michelle Alonso-Basanta; Donald M OʼRourke; Christos Davatzikos Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Kelvin K Leung; Matthew J Clarkson; Jonathan W Bartlett; Shona Clegg; Clifford R Jack; Michael W Weiner; Nick C Fox; Sébastien Ourselin Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-12-23 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: E D H Gates; J S Lin; J S Weinberg; S S Prabhu; J Hamilton; J D Hazle; G N Fuller; V Baladandayuthapani; D T Fuentes; D Schellingerhout Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Evan D H Gates; Jie Yang; Kazutaka Fukumura; Jonathan S Lin; Jeffrey S Weinberg; Sujit S Prabhu; Lihong Long; David Fuentes; Erik P Sulman; Jason T Huse; Dawid Schellingerhout Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Evan D H Gates; Adrian Celaya; Dima Suki; Dawid Schellingerhout; David Fuentes Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: E D H Gates; J S Weinberg; S S Prabhu; J S Lin; J Hamilton; J D Hazle; G N Fuller; V Baladandayuthapani; D T Fuentes; D Schellingerhout Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-11-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Samuel A Bobholz; Allison K Lowman; Alexander Barrington; Michael Brehler; Sean McGarry; Elizabeth J Cochran; Jennifer Connelly; Wade M Mueller; Mohit Agarwal; Darren O'Neill; Andrew S Nencka; Anjishnu Banerjee; Peter S LaViolette Journal: Tomography Date: 2020-06