| Literature DB >> 30854454 |
Ethan J Ulrich1,2, Yusuf Menda3, Laura L Boles Ponto3, Carryn M Anderson4, Brian J Smith5, John J Sunderland3, Michael M Graham3, John M Buatti4, Reinhard R Beichel1,6.
Abstract
Radiomics is an image analysis approach for extracting large amounts of quantitative information from medical images using a variety of computational methods. Our goal was to evaluate the utility of radiomic feature analysis from 18F-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography (FLT PET) obtained at baseline in prediction of treatment response in patients with head and neck cancer. Thirty patients with advanced-stage oropharyngeal or laryngeal cancer, treated with definitive chemoradiation therapy, underwent FLT PET imaging before treatment. In total, 377 radiomic features of FLT uptake and feature variants were extracted from volumes of interest; these features variants were defined by either the primary tumor or the total lesion burden, which consisted of the primary tumor and all FLT-avid nodes. Feature variants included normalized measurements of uptake, which were calculated by dividing lesion uptake values by the mean uptake value in the bone marrow. Feature reduction was performed using clustering to remove redundancy, leaving 172 representative features. Effects of these features on progression-free survival were modeled with Cox regression and P-values corrected for multiple comparisons. In total, 9 features were considered significant. Our results suggest that smaller, more homogenous lesions at baseline were associated with better prognosis. In addition, features extracted from total lesion burden had a higher concordance index than primary tumor features for 8 of the 9 significant features. Furthermore, total lesion burden features showed lower interobserver variability.Entities:
Keywords: FLT; PET; head and neck cancer; prediction; radiomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30854454 PMCID: PMC6403029 DOI: 10.18383/j.tom.2018.00038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tomography ISSN: 2379-1381
Overview of Patients in the FLT PET Study (n = 30)
| Patient Characteristics | Categories | Total [%] | Median [Range] |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age at diagnosis (years) | 57 [36–76] | ||
| Sex | Male | 26 [86.7] | |
| Female | 4 [13.3] | ||
| Site | Oropharynx | 27 [90.0] | |
| Larynx | 2 [6.7] | ||
| Unknown primary | 1 [3.3] | ||
| T-Stage | Tx | 1 [3.3] | |
| T1 | 1 [3.3] | ||
| T2 | 15 [50.0] | ||
| T3 | 7 [23.3] | ||
| T4 | 6 [20.0] | ||
| N-Stage | N0 | 5 [16.7] | |
| N1 | 5 [16.7] | ||
| N2 | 16 [53.3] | ||
| N3 | 4 [13.3] | ||
| Overall Stage | II | 2 [6.7] | |
| III | 9 [30.0] | ||
| IVA | 13 [43.3] | ||
| IVB | 6 [20.0] | ||
| Follow-Up (Months) | 22.0 [4.6–36.0] | ||
| Survival Status | Progression-free survival | 21 [70] | |
| Progression or death | 9[ |
a Consists of 4 patients with LR, 4 patients with DM, and 1 patient with LR + DM.
Figure 1.Cluster size distribution for the 172 clusters identified in the feature reduction step.
Comparison of Predictive FLT Features (Progression-Free Survival) With 3 Commonly Used Features, SUV, SUV, and SUV
| Feature (VOI, normalization) | HR [95% CI] | FDR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.0002 | 3.11 [1.70, 5.68] | 0.043 | 0.86 |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.0012 | 3.12 [1.56, 6.24] | 0.058 | 0.72 |
| Spherical Disproportion (LB, U) | 0.0012 | 4.10 [1.56, 10.80] | 0.058 | 0.74 |
| Information Measure of Correlation 2[ | 0.0017 | 0.32 [0.16, 0.65] | 0.058 | 0.79 |
| Zone Percentage[ | 0.0020 | 0.18 [0.04, 0.78] | 0.058 | 0.75 |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.0020 | 2.21 [1.40, 3.47] | 0.058 | 0.83 |
| Q1 Distribution (LB, U) | 0.0042 | 0.36 [0.17, 0.75] | 0.088 | 0.78 |
| Volume (LB, U) | 0.0043 | 2.44 [1.38, 4.32] | 0.088 | 0.74 |
| Information Measure of Correlation 1[ | 0.0046 | 4.07 [1.23, 13.42] | 0.088 | 0.78 |
| SUV | 0.1916 | 0.60 [0.27, 1.33] | 0.395 | 0.66 |
| SUV | 0.3341 | 0.69 [0.32, 1.48] | — | 0.63 |
| SUV | 0.5038 | 0.76 [0.34, 1.71] | — | 0.62 |
Abbreviations: VOI, volume of interest; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; FDR, false-discovery rate; PT, primary tumor; LB, lesion burden; U, unnormalized; N, normalized.
a Calculated from the gray-level run length matrix (GLRLM).
b Calculated from the gray-level size zone matrix (GLSZM).
c Calculated from the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM).
d Not selected in feature reduction step, so FDR was not calculated.
Figure 2.Heatmap of correlations among the 9 baseline 18F-fluorothymidine (FLT) features with the best performance.
Interobserver Agreement for Predictive FLT Features and 3 Commonly Used Features, SUV, SUV, and SUV
| Feature (VOI, normalization) | Measurement Agreement |
|---|---|
| Gray-level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.99 |
| Gray-level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.75 |
| Spherical Disproportion (LB, U) | 0.96 |
| Information Measure of Correlation 2[ | 0.98 |
| Zone Percentage[ | 0.91 |
| Gray-level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.99 |
| Q1 Distribution (LB, U) | 0.90 |
| Volume (LB, U) | 0.99 |
| Information Measure of Correlation 1[ | 0.95 |
| SUV | 1.00 |
| SUV | 1.00 |
| SUV | 0.94 |
Measurement agreement was calculated as the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) between the feature values of the first and second observer.
Abbreviations: VOI, volume of interest; LB, lesion burden; U, unnormalized; N, normalized.
a Calculated from the gray-level run length matrix (GLRLM).
b Calculated from the gray-level size zone matrix (GLSZM).
c Calculated from the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM).
Differences of Model Performance Due to Interobserver Segmentation Variability
| Feature (VOI, normalization) | Δ |
|---|---|
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.00 |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | −0.01 |
| Spherical Disproportion (LB, U) | −0.03 |
| Information Measure of Correlation 2[ | 0.03 |
| Zone Percentage[ | 0.01 |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.01 |
| Q1 Distribution (LB, U) | −0.07 |
| Volume (LB, U) | −0.01 |
| Information Measure of Correlation 1[ | 0.03 |
Change Calculations are the Difference (Δ) of the c-Indices Between the Model of the First Observer and the Model of the Second Observer.
Abbreviations: VOI, volume of interest; LB, lesion burden; U, unnormalized; N, normalized.
a Calculated from the gray-level run length matrix (GLRLM).
b Calculated from the gray-level size zone matrix (GLSZM).
c Calculated from the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM).
Figure 3.Baseline FLT scan slices showing differences in lesion size and shape. Patient later classified as progression-free survival at follow-up (A). Patient later classified as progression at follow-up (B). A favorable prognosis was associated with small tumor volume (Vol) and a lower spherical disproportion (SphDisp).
Figure 4.Baseline FLT scan slices showing differences in lesion texture. Patient later classified as progression-free survival at follow-up (A). Patient later classified as progression at follow-up (B). A favorable prognosis was associated with more homogeneous lesions and finer textures. Gray-level nonuniformity from the gray-level run length matrix (GLNU) has a lower value for more uniform regions. Zone percentage from the gray-level size zone matrix (ZonePct) has a higher value for regions with finer textures.
Comparison of c-Index Values for Unnormalized and Normalized Features
| Feature | Unnormalized | Normalized |
|---|---|---|
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.83 | |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.66 | |
| Information Measure of Correlation 2[ | 0.63 | |
| Zone Percentage[ | 0.73 | |
| Information Measure of Correlation 1[ | 0.56 |
Higher c-Index Values for Each Feature are Indicated in Bold.
a Calculated from the gray-level run length matrix (GLRLM).
b Calculated from the gray-level size zone matrix (GLSZM).
c Calculated from the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM).
Comparison of c-Index Values for Features Calculated from the Primary Tumor and the Total Lesion Burden
| Feature (Normalization) | Primary Tumor | Lesion Burden |
|---|---|---|
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.71 | |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.50 | |
| Spherical Disproportion (U) | 0.49 | |
| Information Measure of Correlation 2[ | 0.75 | |
| Zone Percentage[ | 0.68 | |
| Gray-Level Non-Uniformity[ | 0.71 | |
| Q1 Distribution (U) | 0.64 | |
| Volume (U) | 0.59 | |
| Information Measure of Correlation 1[ | 0.78 |
Higher c-Index Values for Each Feature are Indicated in Bold.
Abbreviations: U, unnormalized; N, normalized.
a Calculated from the gray-level run length matrix (GLRLM).
b Calculated from the gray-level size zone matrix (GLSZM).
c Calculated from the gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM).