| Literature DB >> 31681593 |
Zhenjiang Li1, Chun Han2, Lan Wang2, Jian Zhu1, Yong Yin1, Baosheng Li1.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of the research was to assess the prognostic value of three-dimensional (3D) texture features based on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients undergoing concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CRT).Entities:
Keywords: chemo-radiotherapy; diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; esophageal squamous cell cancer; magnetic resonance imaging; texture analysis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31681593 PMCID: PMC6811607 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.01057
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Clinical and treatment characteristic.
| No. of patients | 72 | |
| > = 62 | 38 | 52.8 |
| <62 | 34 | 47.2 |
| Male | 50 | 69.4 |
| Female | 22 | 30.6 |
| < = 5.5 cm | ||
| >5.5 cm | ||
| Cervical | 2 | 2.8 |
| Upper esophagus | 24 | 33.3 |
| Middle esophagus | 35 | 48.6 |
| Lower esophagus | 11 | 15.3 |
| T2 | 13 | 18.1 |
| T3 | 20 | 27.8 |
| T4 | 39 | 54.2 |
| N0 | 11 | 15.3 |
| N1 | 53 | 73.6 |
| N2 | 8 | 11.1 |
| M0 | 72 | 100 |
| 50 Gy at 2 Gy/fx | 1 | 1.4 |
| 54 Gy at 1.8 Gy/fx | 5 | 6.9 |
| 54 Gy at 2 Gy/fx | 2 | 2.8 |
| 56 Gy at 2 Gy/fx | 1 | 1.4 |
| 57.6 Gy at 1.8 Gy/fx | 1 | 1.4 |
| 59.4 Gy at 1.8 Gy/fx | 4 | 5.6 |
| 60 Gy at 2 Gy/fx | 47 | 65.3 |
| 61.2 Gy at 1.8 Gy/fx | 5 | 6.9 |
| 63 Gy at 2 Gy/fx | 6 | 8.3 |
| IMRT | 58 | 80.6 |
| 3DCRT | 14 | 19.4 |
3DRT, 3 dimensional conformal radiation therapy; IMRT, intensity modulated radiation therapy; fx, fraction.
Figure 1The DWI scans of b = 600, 800, 1,000 s/mm2 from the same patient (82 years old, male, T3N0M0).
Figure 2A free-hand ROI was drawn along the border of the low signal of the tumor on the b = 600 images to cover the entire tumor area of each selected slice. (A,B) show image heterogeneity by the histogram (C). (D) illustrates a tumor slice of the resulting resampled ROI for each of these discretization ranges.
Extracted texture features.
| Mean | Mean/diff energy | Small gradient emphasis | Small zone emphasis |
| Variance | Mean/diff entropy | Large gradient emphasis | Large zone emphasis |
| Median | Mean/diff correlation | No homogeneity of gray | Gray intensity change |
| Maximum | Mean/diff contrast | No homogeneity of gradient | Zone size change |
| Minimum | Mean/diff homogeneity | Energy | Zone percentage |
| Up quarter value | Mean/diff variance | Mean of gray | High intensity emphasis |
| Down quarter value | Mean/diff mean | Mean of gradient | Low intensity small zone emphasis |
| Energy | Mean/diff inertia | Variance of gray | High intensity small zone emphasis |
| Entropy | Mean/diff cluster shade | Variance of gradient | Low intensity large zone emphasis |
| Skewness | Mean/diff cluster tendency | Correlation of gradient | High intensity large zone emphasis |
| Kurtosis | Mean/diff max probability | Entropy of gray | |
| Mean/diff inverse variance | Entropy of gradient | ||
| Mean/diff inverse difference moment | Mix entropy | ||
| Mean/diff sum mean | Inertia | ||
| Mean/diff sum entropy | Inverse difference moment | ||
| Mean/diff difference entropy |
IHIST, Intensity histogram texture; GLCM, gray level co-occurrence matrix; GLGCM, gray level gradient co-occurrence; ISZFs, Intensity size-zone variability features; diff, the extreme difference of feature.
128 GLCM features are constructed by 64 mean values and 64 extreme difference values. Similarly, 60 gray gradient features were extracted from GLGCM.
Conventional prognostic factors for patients.
| Male | 74 | 34 | 1 | |||
| Female | 68.2 | 36.4 | 0.325 | 0.710 | 0.360 | 1.403 |
| > = 62 | 66.7 | 25 | 1 | |||
| <62 | 77.8 | 44.4 | 0.168 | 1.002 | 0.991 | 1.055 |
| Cervival | 50 | 50 | 1 | |||
| Upper esophagus | 79.2 | 33.3 | 0.884 | 0.851 | 0.098 | 7.356 |
| Middle esophagus | 71.4 | 34.3 | 0.626 | 1.284 | 0.469 | 3.513 |
| Lower esophagus | 63.6 | 36.4 | 0.499 | 1.394 | 0.531 | 3.658 |
| < = 5 (40) | 77.5 | 35 | 1 | |||
| >5 (32) | 65.6 | 34.4 | 1.149 | 1.042 | 1.268 | |
| T2 | 0.85 | 0.38 | 1 | |||
| T3 | 0.75 | 0.3 | 0.9042 | 1.0763 | 0.4629 | 2.5024 |
| T4 | 0.66 | 0.36 | 0.2153 | 1.6345 | 0.7702 | 3.4688 |
| N0 | 70 | 40 | 1 | |||
| N1 | 73.6 | 34.0 | 0.835 | 1.135 | 0.345 | 3.728 |
| N2 | 77.8 | 44.4 | 0.741 | 1.172 | 0.458 | 2.996 |
| TNM stage I–II | 78.1 | 34.4 | 1 | |||
| III | 67.5 | 35 | 0.120 | 1.274 | 0.939 | 1.727 |
| < = 40.35 | 83.3 | 36.1 | 1 | |||
| >40.35 | 61.1 | 33.3 | 0.476 | 0.261 | 0.868 | |
| CR | 86.1 | 38.9 | 1 | |||
| PR | 58.3 | 30.6 | 1.851 | 1.024 | 3.346 | |
| > = 60 | 81.5 | 40.7 | 1 | |||
| <60 | 44.4 | 16.7 | 0.916 | 0.807 | 1.015 | |
| IMRT | 69.0 | 32.8 | 1 | |||
| 3DCRT | 85.7 | 42.9 | 0.906 | 1.043 | 0.516 | 2.108 |
3DRT, 3 dimensional conformal radiation therapy; IMRT, intensity modulated radiation therapy; GTV, Gross Tumor Volume; TE, therapeutic effect. The bold values show that the P ≤ 0.05.
Multivariate analysis of prognostic factor for patients with ESCC.
| Radiation dose | −0.125 | 0.067 | 5.112 | 1 | 0.026 | 1.211 | 0.925 | 1.326 |
| IHIST_energy | −0.056 | 0.021 | 7.482 | 1 | 0.007 | 0.952 | 0.911 | 0.995 |
| m_contrast_1 | 0.146 | 0.028 | 19.47 | 1 | 0.001 | 1.152 | 1.128 | 1.195 |
| Diff_homogeneity_2 | −0.022 | 0.002 | 8.824 | 1 | 0.003 | 0.963 | 0.941 | 0.981 |
| m_Inverencevariance_2 | 0.036 | 0.014 | 4.06 | 1 | 0.034 | 1.042 | 1.002 | 1.13 |
| HISE | −0.053 | 0.018 | 8.016 | 1 | 0.004 | 0.942 | 0.913 | 0.952 |
| LILE | 0.067 | 0.033 | 9.735 | 1 | 0.003 | 1.085 | 1.033 | 1.139 |
IHIST_energy, the energy of intensity histogram texture; m_contrast_1, the mean of contrast in distance 1 of 26 directions; Diff_homogeneity_2, the extreme difference of homogeneity in distance 2 of 26 directions; m_Inverencevariance_2, the mean of inverse variance in distance 2 of 26 directions; HISE, high intensity small zone emphasis; LILE, low intensity large zone emphasis.
Figure 3The mean, median, maximum, minimum, and 25 and 75% quartiles of time-dependent AUC at each time point across all fold predictions.
Figure 4The median of the predicted survival probability and the median of the observed survival probability by the Kaplan-Meier method with 95% CI. The x axis depicts the observed value; the y axis depicts the predicted values in the corresponding point.
Figure 5The Kaplan-Meier survival curves and evaluation of the number at risk from 1 to 3 years for the three risk groups using the “hdnom” package in R software. The p-value of the log-rank test is 0.00773.