| Literature DB >> 30854452 |
Sarah A Mattonen1, Guido A Davidzon2, Shaimaa Bakr3, Sebastian Echegaray1, Ann N C Leung1, Minal Vasanawala4, George Horng5, Sandy Napel1, Viswam S Nair1,6,7.
Abstract
We identified computational imaging features on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) that predict recurrence/progression in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We retrospectively identified 291 patients with NSCLC from 2 prospectively acquired cohorts (training, n = 145; validation, n = 146). We contoured the metabolic tumor volume (MTV) on all pretreatment PET images and added a 3-dimensional penumbra region that extended outward 1 cm from the tumor surface. We generated 512 radiomics features, selected 435 features based on robustness to contour variations, and then applied randomized sparse regression (LASSO) to identify features that predicted time to recurrence in the training cohort. We built Cox proportional hazards models in the training cohort and independently evaluated the models in the validation cohort. Two features including stage and a MTV plus penumbra texture feature were selected by LASSO. Both features were significant univariate predictors, with stage being the best predictor (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.15 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.56-2.95], P < .001). However, adding the MTV plus penumbra texture feature to stage significantly improved prediction (P = .006). This multivariate model was a significant predictor of time to recurrence in the training cohort (concordance = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.66-0.81], P < .001) that was validated in a separate validation cohort (concordance = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.67-0.81], P < .001). A combined radiomics and clinical model improved NSCLC recurrence prediction. FDG PET radiomic features may be useful biomarkers for lung cancer prognosis and add clinical utility for risk stratification.Entities:
Keywords: PET; lung cancer; radiomics; recurrence; risk stratification
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30854452 PMCID: PMC6403030 DOI: 10.18383/j.tom.2018.00026
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tomography ISSN: 2379-1381
Number of Extracted Features
| Region of Interest | Feature Type | Number of Features | Total Number of Features in ROI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Metabolic Tumor Volume (MTV) | Size | 4 | 200 |
| Sphericity | 1 | ||
| LVII shape | 39 | ||
| Intensity | 12 | ||
| GLCM texture | 144 | ||
| Penumbra | Intensity | 12 | 156 |
| GLCM texture | 144 | ||
| MTV + Penumbra | Intensity | 12 | 156 |
| GLCM texture | 144 | ||
| Total Number of Features | 512 | ||
Baseline Patient and Lesion Characteristics
| Training (n=145) | Validation (n=146) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 69 (42–87) | 71 (41–96) | .057 | |
| Gender | Male | 109 (75%) | 87 (60%) | .005 |
| Tumor Location | Right upper lobe | 52 (36%) | 50 (34%) | .571 |
| Right middle lobe | 14 (10%) | 9 (6%) | ||
| Right lower lobe | 21 (14%) | 26 (18%) | ||
| Left upper lobe | 38 (26%) | 34 (23%) | ||
| Left lower lobe | 20 (14%) | 27 (19%) | ||
| Tumor Histology | Adenocarcinoma | 113 (78%) | 103 (71%) | .035 |
| Squamous cell | 29 (20%) | 30 (21%) | ||
| Non–small cell cancer not otherwise specified | 3 (2%) | 13 (9%) | ||
| Tumor Stage | 0[ | 4 (3%) | 0 (0%) | <.001 |
| I | 89 (61%) | 100 (68%) | ||
| II | 28 (19%) | 13 (9%) | ||
| III | 21 (14%) | 17 (12%) | ||
| IV | 3 (2%) | 16 (11%) | ||
| Recurrence/Progression | Yes | 40 (28%) | 57 (39%) | .038 |
| No | 105 (72%) | 89 (61%) | ||
Variables shown as median (range) or number (%).
a Pathological stage 0 disease is defined as a carcinoma in situ (TisN0M0) as per the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition staging system.
Inter- and Intraobserver Variability in Metabolic Tumor Volume (MTV) PET-edge Segmentations
| Observer[ | Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) | Mean Absolute Boundary Distance (MAD, mm) | Absolute Volume Difference (mL)[ |
|---|---|---|---|
| A vs a (Intra) | 0.916 (0.090) | 0.548 (0.544) | 0.71 (1.66) |
| A vs B (Inter) | 0.917 (0.087) | 0.559 (0.507) | 0.58 (0.92) |
| a vs B (Inter) | 0.904 (0.105) | 0.628 (0.631) | 0.79 (1.46) |
All values are the mean (standard deviation).
a Observer 1 contoured each tumor twice (A and a) and observer 2 contoured each lesion once (B).
b For reference, the average [range] volumes of all MTV contours by the three observers were 15.4 [0.4–297.8], 15.3 [0.4–296.9], and 15.3 [0.3–296.0] mL.
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for All FDG-PET Radiomic Features
| Feature Type | MTV | Penumbra | MTV + Penumbra | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inter- | Intra- | Inter- | Intra- | Inter- | Intra- | |
| Size | 0.996(0.99–1.00) | 0.994(0.99–1.00) | – | – | – | – |
| Intensity | 0.977(0.89–1.00) | 0.972(0.84–1.00) | 0.931(0.48–0.99) | 0.916(0.36–0.99) | 0.995(0.98–1.00) | 0.995(0.98–1.00) |
| Shape | 0.867(0.37–0.98) | 0.847(0.39–0.98) | – | – | – | – |
| Texture | 0.898(0.50–0.99) | 0.893(0.48–0.99) | 0.892(0.14–0.99) | 0.925(0.50–0.99) | 0.981(0.28–1.00) | 0.977(0.66–1.00) |
All values are shown as the mean (range).
Number (percent) of Robust FDG-PET Radiomic Features Selected in Each Category by Virtue of an ICC > 0.8
| Feature Type | MTV | Penumbra | MTV + Penumbra | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inter- | Intra- | Inter- | Intra- | Inter- | Intra- | |
| Size | 4 (100%) | 4 (100%) | – | – | – | – |
| Intensity | 12 (100%) | 12 (100%) | 11 (92%) | 11 (92%) | 12 (100%) | 12 (100%) |
| Shape | 27 (68%) | 30 (75%) | – | – | – | – |
| Texture | 115 (80%) | 115 (80%) | 118 (82%) | 131 (91%) | 144 (100%) | 142 (99%) |
Cox Proportional Hazards Model Statistics for Univariate Features in the Training Cohort
| Feature | Akaike Information Criterion | Likelihood Ratio | HR [95% CI] | Concordance [95% CI] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage | 341.7 | 19.98 | <.001 | 2.15[1.56–2.95] | 0.68[0.60–0.76] |
| Gray-level Cooccurrence Matrix Maximum Probability (MTV + Penumbra) | 347.5 | 14.18 | <.001 | 0.41[0.23–0.74] | 0.66[0.57–0.74] |
| SUVmax | 353.7 | 7.99 | .005 | 1.06[1.02–1.10] | 0.67[0.58–0.75] |
Figure 1.Pearson correlation coefficient heatmap for the radiomic and standard clinical variables.
Cox Proportional Hazards Model Statistics for Univariate Features in the Validation Cohort
| Feature | Akaike Information Criterion | Likelihood Ratio | HR [95% CI] | Concordance[95% CI] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage | 475.6 | 35.7 | <.001 | 2.13[1.69–2.68] | 0.69[0.63–0.76] |
| Gray-level Cooccurrence Matrix Maximum Probability (MTV + Penumbra) | 497.2 | 14.14 | <.001 | 0.50[0.33–0.76] | 0.66[0.60–0.72] |
| SUVmax | 506.1 | 5.24 | .02 | 1.03[1.01–1.05] | 0.67[0.61–0.73] |
Figure 2.Kaplan–Meier curves for the multivariate stage and radiomic texture model risk scores in the training cohort (n = 145, P < .001) (A) and the validation cohort (n = 146, P < .001) (B). Patients have been stratified on the basis of median risk value in the training cohort. The shaded regions represent the 95% confidence intervals (CI) and “+” indicates censored data.
Figure 3.Example computed tomography (CT) image (left), corresponding positron emission tomography (PET) image (middle), and fused PET/CT images (right) for 2 patients, where the metabolic tumor volume (MTV) is encircled in magenta and the penumbra in between the magenta and blue outlines. Patients (A) and (B) had relatively high SUVmax values, but the radiomics model distinguished the high-risk patient (A) who recurred at 16-month follow-up and the low-risk patient (B) who had not recurred at just under 5 years of follow-up.