| Literature DB >> 32642141 |
Yangyang Sun1, Bin Wang2, Ke Bi3, Xue Meng1, Lei Zhang4, Xiwen Sun2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frozen sections (FS) deferral sometimes occurs in the intraoperative pathological classification of early lung adenocarcinoma, which is not conducive to the decision-making of surgical treatment. Here, we compared the predictive performance of the combined nomogram based on the computer tomography (CT) features with FS to investigate whether the nomogram could be used as a complementary method for FS when FS deferral occurs to predict invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC) manifesting as ground-glass nodules (GGNs) during surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Nomogram; forecasting; frozen section (FS); lung neoplasms; spiral computed tomography
Year: 2020 PMID: 32642141 PMCID: PMC7330398 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2020.03.75
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Thorac Dis ISSN: 2072-1439 Impact factor: 2.895
Figure 1Study flowchart.
Figure 2Examples in the data set of nodules. The blue shadow represent the shape of the lesions. The final pathology is the diagnosis of postoperative paraffin sections. The CT images and paraffin sections [hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), ×100 for AAH, AIS and MIA, hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), ×40 for IAC] are AAH, AIS, MIA and IAC respectively. AAH, atypical adenomatous hyperplasia; AIS, adenocarcinoma in situ; MIA, minimally invasive adenocarcinoma; IAC, invasive adenocarcinoma.
Clinical characteristics of patients in training set and validation set
| Variables | Training set | Validation set | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-IAC (n=92) | IAC (n=31) | P | Non-IAC (n=62) | IAC (n=20) | P | ||
| Age (years) | 51.5±11.3 | 60.0±10.1 | <0.001 | 48.7±11.7 | 60.7±9.9 | <0.001 | |
| Gender, n (%) | 0.097 | 0.629 | |||||
| Male | 29 (31.5) | 5 (16.1) | 19 (30.6) | 5 (25.0) | |||
| Female | 63 (68.5) | 26 (83.9) | 43 (69.4) | 15 (75.0) | |||
| Nodule type, n (%) | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||||
| PGGNs | 48 (52.2) | 2 (6.5) | 36 (58.1) | 2 (10.0) | |||
| MGGNs | 44 (47.8) | 29 (93.5) | 26 (41.9) | 18 (90.0) | |||
| Vacuole sign | 6 (6.5) | 5 (16.1) | 0.263 | 6 (9.7) | 1 (5.0) | 1 | |
| Spiculation | 2 (2.2) | 3 (9.7) | <0.05 | 3 (4.8) | 4 (20.0) | <0.05 | |
| Lobulation | 14 (15.2) | 9 (29.0) | 0.161 | 8 (12.9) | 5 (25.0) | 0.288 | |
| Pleural retraction | 8 (8.7) | 6 (19.4) | 0.432 | 7 (11.3) | 2 (10.0) | 1 | |
| Solid part diameter | 0 (0, 4.2) | 6.9 (5.2,8.5) | <0.001 | 0 (0, 4.1) | 6.2 (5.4, 7.9) | <0.001 | |
| Solid part proportion | 0 (0, 4.6) | o.45 (0.36, 0.61) | <0.001 | 0 (0, 0.50) | 0.45 (0.39, 0.56) | <0.01 | |
| Intraoperatively tumor size | 7.0 (6.0, 10.0) | 13.0 (10.0, 15.0) | <0.001 | 7.0 (5.0, 8.0) | 15.0 (10.0, 16.0) | <0.001 | |
| CT long diameter | 11.5 (9.4, 14.0) | 16.0 (13.3, 18.6) | <0.001 | 10.5 (9.1, 12.3) | 16.3 (13.3, 18.4) | <0.001 | |
| CT short diameter | 8.0 (6.6, 9.3) | 11.4 (9.5, 14.2) | <0.001 | 7.1 (5.8, 8.8) | 10.6 (8.8, 11.7) | <0.001 | |
| Mean CT value | −593.4 (−641.3, −561.4) | −464.7 (−550.6, −400.8) | <0.001 | −604.2 (−652.5, −541.6) | −483.4 (−553.0, −382.4) | <0.001 | |
| Maximum CT value | −418.6 (-513.0, −343.0) | −163.7 (−264.0, −59.0) | <0.001 | −455.5 (−545.0, −302.8) | −181.5 (−294.8, −52.8) | <0.001 | |
| Variance of CT value | 107.1 (−83.7, 126.6) | 171.7 (147.6, 197.8) | <0.001 | 101.3 (74.7, 130.8) | 162.3 (138.3, 189.5) | <0.001 | |
| Volume | 451.0 (271.3, 670.4) | 1,795.3 (736.8, 2,304.7) | <0.001 | 296.4 (209.3, 573.7) | 1,544.9 (9,35.3, 1,960.6) | <0.001 | |
Qualitative variables are described as n (%), quantitative variables are described as mean ± SD or median (25th−75th). P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Mean CT value, maximum CT value and variance of CT value were measured in the largest circle within the lesion at the maximum cross-section by the radiologists. Intraoperatively tumor size was immediately measured by pathologists after the tumor tissue was resected by a thoracic surgeon. IAC, invasive lung adenocarcinoma; Non-IAC indicates atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma; PGGNs, pure ground-glass nodules; MGGNs, mixed ground-glass nodules.
Collinearity statistics results
| Features | Tolerance | VIF |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.736 | 1.359 |
| Gender | 0.902 | 1.109 |
| Solid part diameter | 0.037 | 27.338 |
| Solid partial proportion | 0.038 | 26.330 |
| Nodule type | 0.126 | 7.908 |
| Vacuole sign | 0.828 | 1.208 |
| Spiculation | 0.904 | 1.106 |
| Lobulation | 0.849 | 1.177 |
| Pleural retraction | 0.783 | 1.276 |
| Intraoperatively tumor size | 0.369 | 2.707 |
| CT long diameter | 0.045 | 22.274 |
| CT short diameter | 0.048 | 20.738 |
| Mean CT value | 0.069 | 14.491 |
| Maximum CT value | 0.032 | 31.090 |
| Variance of CT value | 0.045 | 22.083 |
| Volume | 0.110 | 9.058 |
Tolerance <0.05 or VIF >10 indicate the existence of the collinearity. VIF, variance inflation factor; CT, computed tomography.
Independent predictors of the IAC diagnoses
| Predictors | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | P | OR | 95% CI | P | ||
| Age | 1.081 | 1.033−1.131 | <0.05 | 1.112 | 1.027−1.204 | <0.01 | |
| Solid part diameter | 1.865 | 1,471−2.364 | <0.001 | 1.478 | 1.118−1.953 | <0.01 | |
| Intraoperatively tumor size | 1.522 | 1.298−1.784 | <0.001 | 1.309 | 1.067−1.606 | <0.05 | |
| Mean CT value | 1.016 | 1.010−1.022 | <0.001 | 1.011 | 1.003−1.019 | <0.01 | |
| Nodule type | 15.818 | 3.564−70.197 | <0.001 | 0.952 | 0.022−41.764 | 0.980 | |
| Long diameter | 1.376 | 1.207−1.569 | <0.001 | 0.966 | 0.636−1.467 | 0.872 | |
| Variance of CT value | 1.046 | 1.029−1.064 | <0.001 | 1.024 | 0.984−1.065 | 0.240 | |
| Volume | 1.001 | 1.001−1.002 | <0.001 | 1.001 | 0.999−1.003 | 0.538 | |
| Gender | 2.394 | 0.835−6.863 | 0.104 | − | − | − | |
| Vacuole sign | 2.123 | 0.558−8.085 | 0.270 | − | − | − | |
| Spiculation | 4.395 | 0.926−20.866 | 0.062 | − | − | − | |
| Lobulation | 2.213 | 0.718−6.822 | 0.167 | − | − | − | |
| Pleural retraction | 1.497 | 0.547−4.100 | 0.432 | − | − | − | |
Intraoperatively tumor size was measured by pathologists immediately after the tumor tissue was resected by a thoracic surgeon. Solid part diameter, Long diameter, and Volume were measured by the radiologists in the preoperative CT images. The features which P<0.05 in the univariate analysis were included into the multivariate analysis. IAC, invasive adenocarcinoma; Non-IAC indicates atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma.
Figure 3Combined nomogram for the prediction of invasive lung adenocarcinoma (A). Calibration curves of the combined nomogram in the training and validation sets (B). Calibration curve describes the calibration of the nomogram in the consistency between the predicted IAC risks and actual results. The 45° line represents the ideal prediction results, the dotted line represents the actual prediction results of the nomogram, and the solid line represents the bias-corrected prediction results of the nomogram. The closer these two lines are to the ideal line, the better the prediction accuracy of the nomogram will be. IAC, invasive adenocarcinoma.
Figure 4The ROC curves for the diagnosis of the nomogram in training set and validation set. ROC, relative operating characteristic.
Confusion matrix of the diagnoses of frozen sections and the nomogram
| Prediction | Final pathological classification | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training cohort | Validation cohort | ||||||
| Non-IAC (n=92) | IAC (n=31) | Total (n=123) | Non-IAC (n=62) | IAC (n=20) | Total (n=82) | ||
| Frozen sections | |||||||
| Non-IAC | 89.1% [82] | 19.4% [6] | 88 | 91.9% [57] | 30.0% [6] | 63 | |
| IAC | 10.9% [10] | 80.6% [25] | 35 | 8.1% [5] | 70.0% [14] | 19 | |
| Combined nomogram | |||||||
| Non-IAC | 93.5% [86] | 16.1% [5] | 91 | 88.7% [55] | 10.0% [2] | 57 | |
| IAC | 6.5% [6] | 83.9% [26] | 32 | 11.3% [7] | 90.0% [18] | 25 | |
All values shown as % [n]. IAC, invasive adenocarcinoma; Non-IAC indicates atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma.
Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of the nomogram and frozen sections
| Method | Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training cohort | |||||
| Nomogram | 91.1 | 83.9 | 93.5 | 81.3 | 94.5 |
| Frozen sections | 87.0 | 80.6 | 89.1 | 71.4 | 93.2 |
| Validation cohort | |||||
| Nomogram | 89.0 | 90.0 | 88.7 | 72.0 | 96.5 |
| Frozen sections | 86.6 | 70.0 | 91.9 | 73.7 | 90.5 |
The comparisons were performed in the training and validation sets. IAC, invasive adenocarcinoma; Non-IAC indicates atypical adenomatous hyperplasia; adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.