| Literature DB >> 32938360 |
Alessandro Stefano1, Albert Comelli1,2, Valentina Bravatà3, Stefano Barone4, Igor Daskalovski5, Gaetano Savoca1, Maria Gabriella Sabini6, Massimo Ippolito7, Giorgio Russo1,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Positron Emission Tomography (PET) is increasingly utilized in radiomics studies for treatment evaluation purposes. Nevertheless, lesion volume identification in PET images is a critical and still challenging step in the process of radiomics, due to the low spatial resolution and high noise level of PET images. Currently, the biological target volume (BTV) is manually contoured by nuclear physicians, with a time expensive and operator-dependent procedure. This study aims to obtain BTVs from cerebral metastases in patients who underwent L-[11C]methionine (11C-MET) PET, using a fully automatic procedure and to use these BTVs to extract radiomics features to stratify between patients who respond to treatment or not. For these purposes, 31 brain metastases, for predictive evaluation, and 25 ones, for follow-up evaluation after treatment, were delineated using the proposed method. Successively, 11C-MET PET studies and related volumetric segmentations were used to extract 108 features to investigate the potential application of radiomics analysis in patients with brain metastases. A novel statistical system has been implemented for feature reduction and selection, while discriminant analysis was used as a method for feature classification.Entities:
Keywords: Active contour; Biological target volume; Cancer; Positron emission tomography; Radiomics
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32938360 PMCID: PMC7493376 DOI: 10.1186/s12859-020-03647-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Bioinformatics ISSN: 1471-2105 Impact factor: 3.169
Fig. 1Two examples of three-dimensional volume reconstructions
Comparison of performance in DA classification for predictive evaluation
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Precision | Negative Predictive Value | Error | Accuracy | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 81.23% | 73.97% | 82.94% | 71.95% | 21.73% | 78.27% | ||
| 69.90% | 59.43% | 69.67% | 59.69% | 34.63% | 65.37% |
Fig. 2ROC curves for predictive evaluation. The black bold line represents the combined predicted probability by using the 3 selected features (AUC = 0.73; 95% C.I. 0.52–0.93)
Fig. 3ROC curves for follow-up evaluation. The black bold line represents the combined predicted probability by using the 8 selected features (AUC = 0.79; 95% C.I. 0.59–1.00)
Comparison of performance in DA classification for follow-up evaluation
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Precision | Negative Predictive Value | Error | Accuracy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 86.28% | 87.75% | 92.10% | 80.22% | 13.43% | 86.57% | |
| 94.98% | 67.55% | 75.49% | 92.96% | 19.16% | 80.84% |
Fig. 4The proposed workflow from the fully automatic BTV segmentation process to DA classification to discriminate between patients who respond to treatment or not
Radiomics features extracted from each brain metastasis
| Parent matrix | Feature measure |
|---|---|
| Second angular moment, contrast, entropy, homogeneity, dissimilarity, Inverse difference moment, correlation | |
| Short-run emphasis, long-run emphasis, intensity variability, run-length variability, run percentage, low-intensity run emphasis, high-intensity run emphasis, | |
| low-intensity short-run emphasis, high-intensity short-run emphasis, low-intensity long-run emphasis, high-intensity long-run emphasis | |
| Coarseness, contrast, busyness, complexity, strength | |
| Short-zone emphasis, large-zone emphasis, intensity variability, size-zone variability, zone percentage, low-intensity zone emphasis, high-intensity zone emphasis, low-intensity short-zone emphasis, high-intensity short-zone emphasis, low-intensity large-zone emphasis, high-intensity large-zone emphasis | |
| Second angular moment, contrast, entropy, homogeneity, inverse difference moment, dissimilarity | |
| Max spectrum, Black-white symmetry | |
| Coarseness, homogeneity, mean convergence, variance | |
| Second angular moment, contrast, entropy, homogeneity, intensity, inverse difference moment, correlation, variance, code similarity | |
| Small-number emphasis, large-number emphasis, number nonuniformity, second moment, entropy | |
| Minimum SUV, SUVmax, mean SUV, SUV variance, SUV SD, SUV skewness, SUV kurtosis, SUV skewness (and with bias corrected), SUV kurtosis (and with bias corrected), TLG, tumor volume, entropy, SULpeak, Surface area, Asphericity 1and 2 and 3, Surface mean SUV 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, Surface total SUV 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, Surface SUV entropy 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, Surface SUV variance 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, Surface SUV SD 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, Surface SUV NSR 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, SUVmean prod asphericity, SUVmax prod asphericity, Entropy prod asphericity, SULpeak prod asphericity, SUVmean prod surface area, SUVmax prod surface area, Entropy prod surface area, SULpeak prod surface area |