| Literature DB >> 32053670 |
Jung Hyun Yoon1, Kyunghwa Han2, Eunjung Lee3, Jandee Lee4, Eun-Kyung Kim1, Hee Jung Moon1, Vivian Youngjean Park1, Kee Hyun Nam4, Jin Young Kwak1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether if ultrasonography (US)-based radiomics enables prediction of the presence of BRAFV600E mutations among patients diagnosed as papillary thyroid carcninoma (PTC).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32053670 PMCID: PMC7018006 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228968
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Representative image of tumor segmentation using thyroid US.
A diagonal region-of-interest (ROI) was drawn along the tumor border (red line) for feature extraction.
Demographic features of the total thyroid cancers and conventional PTCs<20-mm according to the presence of BRAFV600E mutation.
| BRAFV600E mutation | Negative (n = 99) | Positive (n = 428) | Negative (n = 68) | Positive (n = 319) | Negative (n = 31) | Positive (n = 109) | |||
| Mean age (years) | 38.4±13.2 | 42.7±13.8 | 0.284 | 38.3±13.4 | 43.1±13.9 | 0.009 | 38.8±13.1 | 41.7±13.4 | 0.288 |
| <55 years | 86 (86.9%) | 334 (78.0%) | 0.064 | 60 (87.0) | 247 (77.7) | 0.118 | 27 (87.1) | 86 (78.9) | 0.446 |
| ≥55 years | 13 (13.1%) | 94 (22.0%) | 9 (13.0) | 71 (22.3) | 4 (12.9) | 23 (21.1) | |||
| Gender | 0.523 | 0.997 | 0.290 | ||||||
| Men | 79 (79.8%) | 326 (76.2%) | 15 (22.7) | 72 (22.6) | 5 (16.1) | 30 (27.5) | |||
| Women | 20 (20.2%) | 102 (23.8%) | 54 (78.3) | 246 (77.4) | 26 (83.9) | 79 (72.5) | |||
| Mean size of tumor (mm) | 18.0±9.1 | 16.0±7.6 | 0.003 | 19.6±10.0 | 15.8±7.4 | 0.004 | 15.2±7.8 | 16.2±7.6 | 0.511 |
| <20mm | 67 (67.7%) | 341 (79.7%) | 0.015 | 40 (58.0) | 254 (79.9) | <0.001 | 27 (87.1) | 87 (79.8) | 0.511 |
| ≥20mm | 32 (32.3%) | 79 (20.3%) | 29 (42.0) | 64 (20.1) | 4 (12.9) | 22 (20.2) | |||
| Radiomics Score (median, interquartile range) | 1.486 (1.160, 1.690) | 1.704 (1.501, 1.836) | <0.001 | 1.615 (1.457, 1.747) | 1.672 (1.519, 1.832) | 0.238 | |||
| Negative (n = 33) | Positive (n = 247) | Negative (n = 23) | Positive (n = 86) | ||||||
| Mean age (years) | 41.1±13.9 | 43.3±13.0 | 0.386 | 39.5±13.9 | 43.0±12.6 | 0.277 | |||
| <55 years | 27 (81.8) | 194 (78.5) | 0.837 | 19 (82.6) | 68 (79.1) | >0.999 | |||
| ≥55 years | 6 (18.2) | 53 (21.5) | 4 (17.4) | 18 (20.9) | |||||
| Gender | 0.151 | 0.587 | |||||||
| Men | 3 (9.1) | 53 (21.5) | 4 (17.4) | 22 (25.6) | |||||
| Women | 30 (90.9) | 194 (78.5) | 19 (82.6) | 64 (74.4) | |||||
| Mean size of tumor (mm) | 12.9±2.7 | 13.0±2.3 | 0.843 | 13.1±2.0 | 13.3±2.4 | 0.720 | |||
| <20mm | - | - | -- | - | - | - | |||
| ≥20mm | - | - | -- | - | - | - | |||
| Radiomics Score (median, interquartile range) | 1.887 (1.734, 2.161) | 2.117 (1.929, 2.257) | <0.001 | 2.089 (1.920, 2.246) | 2.104 (1.949, 2.223) | 0.827 | |||
Fig 2Texture feature selection using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression model.
(A) Tuning parameter (lambda, λ) selection in the LASSO model used 10-fold cross validation for 527 thyroid cancers. The mean deviance (goodness-of-fit statistics, red dots) was plotted versus log(λ), error bars displaying the range of standard error. Dotted vertical lines were drawn at the point of minimum deviance (λ value = 0.03229), and at the point where maximum λ was obtained among errors smaller than the standard error of minimum deviance (λ value = 0.08984). (B) LASSO coefficient profiles of the 730 texture features. A coefficient profile was plotted versus log(λ). The gray vertical line was drawn at the value selected using 10-fold cross validation, where the optimal λ resulted in 8 nonzero coefficients. (C) Tuning parameter (lambda, λ) selection in the LASSO model used 10-fold cross validation for 389 conventional PTCs <20-mm. The mean deviance (goodness-of-fit statistics, red dots) was plotted versus log(λ), error bars displaying the range of standard error. Dotted vertical lines were drawn at the point of minimum deviance (λ value = 0.0329208), and at the point where maximum λ was obtained among errors smaller than the standard error of minimum deviance (λ value = 0.072595). (D) LASSO coefficient profiles plotted versus log(λ), gray vertical line was drawn at the value selected using 10-fold cross validation, where the optimal λ resulted in 4 nonzero coefficients.
Univariable and multivariable analysis in predicting the presence of BRAFV600E mutation in the training cohort of the total thyroid cancers and conventional PTC<20-mm.
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||
| Tumor size | 0.953 | 0.924–0.981 | 0.001 | 1.018 | 0.977–1.060 | 0.394 |
| Age (≥55 years) | 1.916 | 0.948–4.308 | 0.089 | 1.948 | 0.928–4.536 | 0.096 |
| Gender | 1.054 | 0.573–2.035 | 0.871 | 1.757 | 0.877–3.793 | 0.129 |
| Radiomics score | 6.099 | 3.124–12.723 | <0.001 | 8.979 | 3.603–23.920 | <0.001 |
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||
| Tumor size | 1.018 | 0.875–1.198 | 0.825 | 1.030 | 0.872–1.232 | 0.738 |
| Age (≥55 years) | 1.229 | 0.512–3.431 | 0.665 | 1.282 | 0.495–3.943 | 0.632 |
| Gender | 2.732 | 0.926–11.701 | 0.108 | 4.281 | 1.166–27.327 | 0.060 |
| Radiomics score | 9.976 | 3.161–38.451 | <0.001 | 11.279 | 3.624–44.121 | <0.001 |
US: ultrasonography, PTC: papillary thyroid carcinoma, OR: Odds ratio, 95% CI: 95% confidence interval
Fig 3Calibration plots of the grouped prediction models for the presence of BRAFV600E mutation.
For each plot, the y-axis represents the actual probability of BRAFV600E mutation, and the x-axis represents the predicted risk for BRAFV600E mutation. (A) Calibration plot for the total thyroid cancers and (B) conventional PTCs measuring <20-mm included in this study.
Discrimination ability of the models in the total thyroid cancers and the conventional PTCs<20-mm.
| Total (n = 527) | Conventional PTC<20-mm (n = 389) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original | Internal validation | Original | Internal validation | |||||
| c-statistics | 95% CI | Boostrapped c-statistics | 95% CI | c-statistics | 95% CI | Boostrapped c-statistics | 95% CI | |
| Training set | 0.718 | 0.650–0.786 | 0.716 | 0.652–0.786 | 0.729 | 0.632–0.826 | 0.729 | 0.634–0.819 |
| Validation set | 0.629 | 0.516–0.742 | 0.566 | 0.430–0.701 | ||||