OBJECTIVES: This study aims to measure the reproducibility of radiomic features in pancreatic parenchyma and ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) in patients who underwent consecutive contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) scans. METHODS: In this IRB-approved and HIPAA-compliant retrospective study, 37 pairs of scans from 37 unique patients who underwent CECTs within a 2-week interval were included in the analysis of the reproducibility of features derived from pancreatic parenchyma, and a subset of 18 pairs of scans were further analyzed for the reproducibility of features derived from PDAC. In each patient, pancreatic parenchyma and pancreatic tumor (when present) were manually segmented by two radiologists independently. A total of 266 radiomic features were extracted from the pancreatic parenchyma and tumor region and also the volume and diameter of the tumor. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was calculated to assess feature reproducibility for each patient in three scenarios: (1) different radiologists, same CECT; (2) same radiologist, different CECTs; and (3) different radiologists, different CECTs. RESULTS: Among pancreatic parenchyma-derived features, using a threshold of CCC > 0.90, 58/266 (21.8%) and 48/266 (18.1%) features met the threshold for scenario 1, 14/266 (5.3%) and 15/266 (5.6%) for scenario 2, and 14/266 (5.3%) and 10/266 (3.8%) for scenario 3. Among pancreatic tumor-derived features, 11/268 (4.1%) and 17/268 (6.3%) features met the threshold for scenario 1, 1/268 (0.4%) and 5/268 (1.9%) features met the threshold for scenario 2, and no features for scenario 3 met the threshold, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Variations between CECT scans affected radiomic feature reproducibility to a greater extent than variation in segmentation. A smaller number of pancreatic tumor-derived radiomic features were reproducible compared with pancreatic parenchyma-derived radiomic features under the same conditions. KEY POINTS: • For pancreatic-derived radiomic features from contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), fewer than 25% are reproducible (with a threshold of CCC < 0.9) in a clinical heterogeneous dataset. • Variations between CECT scans affected the number of reproducible radiomic features to a greater extent than variations in radiologist segmentation. • A smaller number of pancreatic tumor-derived radiomic features were reproducible compared with pancreatic parenchyma-derived radiomic features under the same conditions.
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to measure the reproducibility of radiomic features in pancreatic parenchyma and ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) in patients who underwent consecutive contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) scans. METHODS: In this IRB-approved and HIPAA-compliant retrospective study, 37 pairs of scans from 37 unique patients who underwent CECTs within a 2-week interval were included in the analysis of the reproducibility of features derived from pancreatic parenchyma, and a subset of 18 pairs of scans were further analyzed for the reproducibility of features derived from PDAC. In each patient, pancreatic parenchyma and pancreatic tumor (when present) were manually segmented by two radiologists independently. A total of 266 radiomic features were extracted from the pancreatic parenchyma and tumor region and also the volume and diameter of the tumor. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was calculated to assess feature reproducibility for each patient in three scenarios: (1) different radiologists, same CECT; (2) same radiologist, different CECTs; and (3) different radiologists, different CECTs. RESULTS: Among pancreatic parenchyma-derived features, using a threshold of CCC > 0.90, 58/266 (21.8%) and 48/266 (18.1%) features met the threshold for scenario 1, 14/266 (5.3%) and 15/266 (5.6%) for scenario 2, and 14/266 (5.3%) and 10/266 (3.8%) for scenario 3. Among pancreatic tumor-derived features, 11/268 (4.1%) and 17/268 (6.3%) features met the threshold for scenario 1, 1/268 (0.4%) and 5/268 (1.9%) features met the threshold for scenario 2, and no features for scenario 3 met the threshold, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Variations between CECT scans affected radiomic feature reproducibility to a greater extent than variation in segmentation. A smaller number of pancreatic tumor-derived radiomic features were reproducible compared with pancreatic parenchyma-derived radiomic features under the same conditions. KEY POINTS: • For pancreatic-derived radiomic features from contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), fewer than 25% are reproducible (with a threshold of CCC < 0.9) in a clinical heterogeneous dataset. • Variations between CECT scans affected the number of reproducible radiomic features to a greater extent than variations in radiologist segmentation. • A smaller number of pancreatic tumor-derived radiomic features were reproducible compared with pancreatic parenchyma-derived radiomic features under the same conditions.
Authors: Gerard M Healy; Emmanuel Salinas-Miranda; Rahi Jain; Xin Dong; Dominik Deniffel; Ayelet Borgida; Ali Hosni; David T Ryan; Nwabundo Njeze; Anne McGuire; Kevin C Conlon; Jonathan D Dodd; Edmund Ronan Ryan; Robert C Grant; Steven Gallinger; Masoom A Haider Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-11-10 Impact factor: 7.034
Authors: Jochen Paul Steinacker; Nora Steinacker-Stanescu; Thomas Ettrich; Marko Kornmann; Katharina Kneer; Ambros Beer; Meinrad Beer; Stefan Andreas Schmidt Journal: Visc Med Date: 2020-04-07
Authors: Sherif B Elsherif; Sanaz Javadi; Ott Le; Nathan Lamba; Matthew H G Katz; Eric P Tamm; Priya R Bhosale Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2022-03
Authors: Reza Reiazi; Colin Arrowsmith; Mattea Welch; Farnoosh Abbas-Aghababazadeh; Christopher Eeles; Tony Tadic; Andrew J Hope; Scott V Bratman; Benjamin Haibe-Kains Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-05-08 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Usman Mahmood; Aditya Apte; Christopher Kanan; David D B Bates; Giuseppe Corrias; Lorenzo Manneli; Jung Hun Oh; Yusuf Emre Erdi; John Nguyen; Joseph O'Deasy; Amita Shukla-Dave Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2021-06-29
Authors: Zbigniew Starosolski; Amy N Courtney; Mayank Srivastava; Linjie Guo; Igor Stupin; Leonid S Metelitsa; Ananth Annapragada; Ketan B Ghaghada Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 3.161