Literature DB >> 32691383

Quantification of Structural Heterogeneity Using Fractal Analysis of Contrast-Enhanced CT Image to Predict Survival in Gastric Cancer Patients.

Hiroki Watanabe1, Koichi Hayano2, Gaku Ohira1, Shunsuke Imanishi1, Toshiharu Hanaoka1, Atsushi Hirata1, Masayuki Kano1, Hisahiro Matsubara1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Malignant tumor essentially implies structural heterogeneity. Fractal analysis of medical imaging has a potential to quantify this structural heterogeneity in the tumor AIMS: The purpose of this study is to quantify this structural abnormality in the tumor applying fractal analysis to contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) image and to evaluate its biomarker value for predicting survival of surgically treated gastric cancer patients.
METHODS: A total of 108 gastric cancer patients (77 men and 31 women; mean age: 69.1 years), who received curative surgery without any neoadjuvant therapy, were retrospectively investigated. Portal-phase CE-CT images were analyzed with use of a plug-in tool for ImageJ (NIH, Bethesda, USA), and the fractal dimension (FD) in the tumor was calculated using a differential box-counting method to quantify structural heterogeneity in the tumor. Tumor FD was compared with clinicopathologic features and disease-specific survival (DSS).
RESULTS: High FD value of the tumor significantly associated with high T stage and high pathological stage (P = 0.009, 0.007, respectively). In Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients with higher FD tumors (FD > 0.9746) showed a significantly worse DSS (P = 0.009, log rank). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that tumor FD, T stage, and N stage were independent prognostic factors for DSS. In subset analysis of lymph-node positive gastric cancers, only tumor FD was an independent prognostic factor for DSS.
CONCLUSION: CT fractal analysis can be a useful biomarker for gastric cancer patients, reflecting survival and clinicopathologic features.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contrast-enhanced CT; Fractal analysis; Gastric cancer; Heterogeneity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32691383     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-020-06479-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  23 in total

1.  Computed tomography image characteristics of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Authors:  Shih-Han Hung; Chien-Yu Lin; Jui-Ying Lee; How Tseng
Journal:  Auris Nasus Larynx       Date:  2012-02-10       Impact factor: 1.863

2.  Assessment of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic renal cell cancer: CT texture as a predictive biomarker.

Authors:  Vicky Goh; Balaji Ganeshan; Paul Nathan; Jaspal K Juttla; Anup Vinayan; Kenneth A Miles
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Fractal analysis of contrast-enhanced CT images to predict survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sunitinib.

Authors:  Koichi Hayano; Hiroyuki Yoshida; Andrew X Zhu; Dushyant V Sahani
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-02-22       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 4.  HCC and angiogenesis: possible targets and future directions.

Authors:  Andrew X Zhu; Dan G Duda; Dushyant V Sahani; Rakesh K Jain
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-03-08       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Intratumor heterogeneity in evolutionary models of tumor progression.

Authors:  Rick Durrett; Jasmine Foo; Kevin Leder; John Mayberry; Franziska Michor
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Fractal analysis of CT perfusion images for evaluation of antiangiogenic treatment and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Koichi Hayano; Sang Ho Lee; Hiroyuki Yoshida; Andrew X Zhu; Dushyant V Sahani
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.173

7.  Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012.

Authors:  Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 7.396

8.  Quantifying tumour heterogeneity with CT.

Authors:  Balaji Ganeshan; Kenneth A Miles
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 3.909

9.  Structural adaptation and heterogeneity of normal and tumor microvascular networks.

Authors:  Axel R Pries; Annemiek J M Cornelissen; Anoek A Sloot; Marlene Hinkeldey; Matthew R Dreher; Michael Höpfner; Mark W Dewhirst; Timothy W Secomb
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2009-05-29       Impact factor: 4.475

Review 10.  CT texture analysis using the filtration-histogram method: what do the measurements mean?

Authors:  Kenneth A Miles; Balaji Ganeshan; Michael P Hayball
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2013-09-23       Impact factor: 3.909

View more
  3 in total

1.  Fractal Analysis of a Non-Newtonian Fluid Flow in a Rough-Walled Pipe.

Authors:  Abdellah Bouchendouka; Zine El Abiddine Fellah; Zakaria Larbi; Zineeddine Louna; Erick Ogam; Mohamed Fellah; Claude Depollier
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-22       Impact factor: 3.748

Review 2.  Endoscopic Ultrasound vs. Computed Tomography for Gastric Cancer Staging: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Bogdan Silviu Ungureanu; Victor Mihai Sacerdotianu; Adina Turcu-Stiolica; Irina Mihaela Cazacu; Adrian Saftoiu
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-16

Review 3.  The seen and the unseen: Molecular classification and image based-analysis of gastrointestinal cancers.

Authors:  Corina-Elena Minciuna; Mihai Tanase; Teodora Ecaterina Manuc; Stefan Tudor; Vlad Herlea; Mihnea P Dragomir; George A Calin; Catalin Vasilescu
Journal:  Comput Struct Biotechnol J       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 6.155

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.