Literature DB >> 30747300

Influence of segmentation margin on machine learning-based high-dimensional quantitative CT texture analysis: a reproducibility study on renal clear cell carcinomas.

Burak Kocak1, Ece Ates2, Emine Sebnem Durmaz3, Melis Baykara Ulusan2, Ozgur Kilickesmez2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the possible influence of segmentation margin on each step (feature reproducibility, selection, and classification) of the machine learning (ML)-based high-dimensional quantitative computed tomography (CT) texture analysis (qCT-TA) of renal clear cell carcinomas (RcCCs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this retrospective study, 47 patients with RcCC were included from a public database. Two segmentations were obtained by two radiologists for each tumour: (i) contour-focused and (ii) margin shrinkage of 2 mm. Texture features were extracted from original, filtered, and transformed CT images. Feature selection was done using a correlation-based algorithm. The ML classifier was k-nearest neighbours. Classifications were performed with and without using synthetic minority over-sampling technique. Reference standard was nuclear grade (low versus high). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson's correlation coefficient, Wilcoxon signed-ranks test, and McNemar's test were used in the analysis.
RESULTS: The segmentation with margin shrinkage of 2 mm (772 of 828; 93.2%) yielded more texture features with excellent reproducibility (ICC ≥ 0.9) than contour-focused segmentation (714 of 828; 86.2%), p < 0.0001. The feature selection algorithms resulted in different feature subsets for two segmentation datasets with only one common feature. All ML-based models based on contour-focused segmentation (area under the curve [AUC] range, 0.865-0.984) performed better than those with margin shrinkage of 2 mm (AUC range, 0.745-0.887), p < 0.05.
CONCLUSIONS: Each step of the ML-based high-dimensional qCT-TA was susceptible to a slight change of 2 mm in segmentation margin. Despite yielding fewer features with excellent reproducibility, use of the contour-focused segmentation provided better classification performance for distinguishing nuclear grade. KEY POINTS: • Each step of a machine learning (ML)-based high-dimensional quantitative computed tomography texture analysis (qCT-TA) is sensitive to even a slight change of 2 mm in segmentation margin. • Despite yielding fewer texture features with excellent reproducibility, performing the segmentation focusing on the outermost boundary of the tumours provides better classification performance in ML-based qCT-TA of renal clear cell carcinomas for distinguishing nuclear grade. • Findings of an ML-based high-dimensional qCT-TA may not be reproducible in clinical practice even using the same feature selection algorithm and ML classifier unless the possible influence of the segmentation margin is considered.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Artificial intelligence; Clear cell renal cell carcinoma; Machine learning; Multidetector computed tomography; Radiomics

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30747300     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-6003-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  31 in total

1.  Influence of MRI acquisition protocols and image intensity normalization methods on texture classification.

Authors:  G Collewet; M Strzelecki; F Mariette
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 2.546

2.  Assessment of tumor heterogeneity by CT texture analysis: can the largest cross-sectional area be used as an alternative to whole tumor analysis?

Authors:  Francesca Ng; Robert Kozarski; Balaji Ganeshan; Vicky Goh
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2012-11-26       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA): maintaining and operating a public information repository.

Authors:  Kenneth Clark; Bruce Vendt; Kirk Smith; John Freymann; Justin Kirby; Paul Koppel; Stephen Moore; Stanley Phillips; David Maffitt; Michael Pringle; Lawrence Tarbox; Fred Prior
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Mathematical model to predict individual survival for patients with renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Amnon Zisman; Allan J Pantuck; Fredrick Dorey; Debby H Chao; Barbara J Gitlitz; Nancy Moldawer; Dana Lazarovici; Jean B deKernion; Robert A Figlin; Arie S Belldegrun
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-03-01       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Active surveillance of small renal masses: progression patterns of early stage kidney cancer.

Authors:  Michael A S Jewett; Kamal Mattar; Joan Basiuk; Christopher G Morash; Stephen E Pautler; D Robert Siemens; Simon Tanguay; Ricardo A Rendon; Martin E Gleave; Darrel E Drachenberg; Raymond Chow; Hannah Chung; Joseph L Chin; Neil E Fleshner; Andrew J Evans; Brenda L Gallie; Masoom A Haider; John R Kachura; Ghada Kurban; Kimberly Fernandes; Antonio Finelli
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  High quality machine-robust image features: identification in nonsmall cell lung cancer computed tomography images.

Authors:  Luke A Hunter; Shane Krafft; Francesco Stingo; Haesun Choi; Mary K Martel; Stephen F Kry; Laurence E Court
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Stability of FDG-PET Radiomics features: an integrated analysis of test-retest and inter-observer variability.

Authors:  Ralph T H Leijenaar; Sara Carvalho; Emmanuel Rios Velazquez; Wouter J C van Elmpt; Chintan Parmar; Otto S Hoekstra; Corneline J Hoekstra; Ronald Boellaard; André L A J Dekker; Robert J Gillies; Hugo J W L Aerts; Philippe Lambin
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 4.089

8.  Tumor size does not predict risk of metastatic disease or prognosis of small renal cell carcinomas.

Authors:  Tobias Klatte; Jean-Jacques Patard; Michela de Martino; Karim Bensalah; Gregory Verhoest; Alexandre de la Taille; Clément-Claude Abbou; Ernst Peter Allhoff; Giuseppe Carrieri; Stephen B Riggs; Fairooz F Kabbinavar; Arie S Belldegrun; Allan J Pantuck
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-03-17       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  An outcome prediction model for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma treated with radical nephrectomy based on tumor stage, size, grade and necrosis: the SSIGN score.

Authors:  Igor Frank; Michael L Blute; John C Cheville; Christine M Lohse; Amy L Weaver; Horst Zincke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Natural history and management of small renal masses.

Authors:  T Abou Youssif; S Tanguay
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.677

View more
  22 in total

Review 1.  Radiomics: from qualitative to quantitative imaging.

Authors:  William Rogers; Sithin Thulasi Seetha; Turkey A G Refaee; Relinde I Y Lieverse; Renée W Y Granzier; Abdalla Ibrahim; Simon A Keek; Sebastian Sanduleanu; Sergey P Primakov; Manon P L Beuque; Damiënne Marcus; Alexander M A van der Wiel; Fadila Zerka; Cary J G Oberije; Janita E van Timmeren; Henry C Woodruff; Philippe Lambin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Radiomics with artificial intelligence: a practical guide for beginners.

Authors:  Burak Koçak; Emine Şebnem Durmaz; Ece Ateş; Özgür Kılıçkesmez
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.630

3.  MRI Radiomics for the Prediction of Fuhrman Grade in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: a Machine Learning Exploratory Study.

Authors:  Arnaldo Stanzione; Carlo Ricciardi; Renato Cuocolo; Valeria Romeo; Jessica Petrone; Michela Sarnataro; Pier Paolo Mainenti; Giovanni Improta; Filippo De Rosa; Luigi Insabato; Arturo Brunetti; Simone Maurea
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 4.  Radiomics: a primer on high-throughput image phenotyping.

Authors:  Kyle J Lafata; Yuqi Wang; Brandon Konkel; Fang-Fang Yin; Mustafa R Bashir
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-08-25

5.  Usefulness of computed tomography textural analysis in renal cell carcinoma nuclear grading.

Authors:  Israa Alnazer; Omar Falou; Pascal Bourdon; Thierry Urruty; Rémy Guillevin; Mohamad Khalil; Ahmad Shahin; Christine Fernandez-Maloigne
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2022-09-13

Review 6.  Machine Learning for Renal Pathologies: An Updated Survey.

Authors:  Roberto Magherini; Elisa Mussi; Yary Volpe; Rocco Furferi; Francesco Buonamici; Michaela Servi
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 3.847

Review 7.  Radiomics in immuno-oncology.

Authors:  Z Bodalal; I Wamelink; S Trebeschi; R G H Beets-Tan
Journal:  Immunooncol Technol       Date:  2021-04-16

8.  Assessment of MRI-Based Radiomics in Preoperative T Staging of Rectal Cancer: Comparison between Minimum and Maximum Delineation Methods.

Authors:  Haidi Lu; Yuan Yuan; Zhen Zhou; Xiaolu Ma; Fu Shen; Yuwei Xia; Jianping Lu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  The effects of volume of interest delineation on MRI-based radiomics analysis: evaluation with two disease groups.

Authors:  Xiao Zhang; Liming Zhong; Bin Zhang; Lu Zhang; Haiyan Du; Lijun Lu; Shuixing Zhang; Wei Yang; Qianjin Feng
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2019-12-21       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  Value of radiomics in differential diagnosis of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and renal oncocytoma.

Authors:  Yajuan Li; Xialing Huang; Yuwei Xia; Liling Long
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.