| Literature DB >> 33057772 |
Caiyue Ren1,2, Jianping Zhang3,4,5,6, Ming Qi3,4,5,6, Jiangang Zhang1,2, Yingjian Zhang3,2,4,5,6, Shaoli Song3,2,4,5,6, Yun Sun7,8,9, Jingyi Cheng10,11,12,13,14.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop and validate a clinico-biological features and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) radiomic-based nomogram via machine learning for the pretherapy prediction of discriminating between adenocarcinoma (ADC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Entities:
Keywords: 18F-FDG PET/CT; Adenocarcinoma; Machine learning; Nomogram; Radiomics; Squamous cell carcinoma
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33057772 PMCID: PMC8113203 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05065-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging ISSN: 1619-7070 Impact factor: 9.236
Fig. 1Flow chart showing the patient selection and exclusion
Clinical and demographic characteristics of NSCLC patients
| Characteristics | Total ( | SCC ( | ADC ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||
| Male | 200 (63.49) | 109 (89.34) | 91 (47.15) |
| Female | 115 (36.51) | 13 (10.66) | 102 (52.85) |
| Age (mean ± SD, year) | 61.89 ± 9.10 | 63.57 ± 8.31 | 60.82 ± 9.43 |
| IASLC stage | |||
| I A | 71 (22.54) | 13 (10.66) | 58 (30.05) |
| I B | 54 (17.14) | 22 (18.03) | 32 (16.58) |
| II A | 24 (7.62) | 12 (9.84) | 12 (6.22) |
| II B | 52 (16.51) | 26 (21.31) | 26 (13.47) |
| III A | 114 (36.19) | 49 (40.16) | 65 (33.68) |
Data in parentheses are percentages unless otherwise noted
NSCLC non-small cell lung cancer, SCC squamous cell carcinoma, ADC adenocarcinoma. SD standard deviation, IASLC International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer
Comparison of clinical characteristics and tumor markers between SCC and ADC patients in training set
| Characteristics | SCC ( | ADC ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||
| Male | 72 (90.00) | 69 (49.29) | |
| Female | 8 (10.00) | 71 (50.71) | |
| Age (year) | 63.99 ± 8.99# | 60.41 ± 9.65# | |
| Height (m) | 1.67 ± 0.08# | 1.64 ± 0.08# | |
| Weight (kg) | 64.50 ± 10.06# | 62.13 ± 10.29# | 0.099 |
| BMI | 23.03 ± 3.00# | 23.08 ± 3.15# | 0.908 |
| Smoking | |||
| Never | 20 (25.00) | 83 (59.29) | |
| Ever/Always | 60 (75.00) | 57 (40.71) | |
| Symptom | |||
| Negative | 14 (17.50) | 68 (48.57) | |
| Positive | 66 (82.50) | 72 (51.43) | |
| Family history | 0.743 | ||
| Negative | 56 (70.00) | 95 (67.86) | |
| Positive | 24 (30.00) | 45 (32.14) | |
| Location | 0.939 | ||
| Right lung | 45 (56.25) | 78 (55.71) | |
| Left lung | 35 (43.75) | 62 (44.29) | |
| Location_1 | 0.327 | ||
| Upper lobe | 43 (53.75) | 84 (60.00) | |
| Middle lobe | 6 (7.50) | 11 (7.86) | |
| Lower lobe | 31 (38.75) | 45 (32.14) | |
| Size (cm) | 5.56 ± 1.98# | 3.69 ± 1.40# | |
| FERR (ng/mL) | 290.60 (190.60, 438.20)* | 203.65 (124.53, 339.10)* | |
| SCCA (ng/mL) | 1.80 (1.30, 3.21)* | 0.80 (0.50, 1.10)* | |
| CA199 (U/mL) | 13.18 (6.94, 23.26)* | 10.19 (6.26, 18.66)* | 0.344 |
| AFP (ng/mL) | 2.52 (1.92, 3.88)* | 2.77 (2.19, 4.21)* | 0.310 |
| CEA (ng/mL) | 3.38 (2.42, 4.88)* | 3.88 (2.17, 8.52)* | 0.483 |
| CYFRA21-1 (ng/mL) | 6.00 (4.58, 10.22)* | 3.11 (2.32, 4.24)* | |
| NSE (ng/mL) | 12. 31 (10.75, 15.29)* | 11.14 (9.93, 12.62)* | |
Data in parentheses are percentages unless otherwise noted
BMI body mass index, FERR ferritin, SCCA squamous cell carcinoma antigen, CA carbohydrate antigen, AFP alpha-fetoprotein, CEA carcinoembryonic antigen, CYFRA21-1 cytokeratin 19 fragment antigen, NSE neuron specific enolase
#Values refer to mean ± standard deviation
*Values refer to median (interquartile range). P values were the results of univariate analysis of each characteristic, and the italics ones indicated statistical significance
Fig. 2Features selection for prediction models using LASSO regression. The X-axis shows log (λ), and the Y-axis shows the model misclassification rate. The 5, 7, 3, and 14 features with non-zero coefficients are indicated for Clin-Lab Model (a), PET-Rad Model (b), CT-Rad Model (c), and Combined Model (d), respectively
Fig. 3Violin plot of 4 prediction models for SCC and ADC patients in training set. The white dot represents the median. The black rectangle is the range from the lower quartile to the upper quartile. The black line running up and down through the violin diagram represents the range from the smallest non-outlier value to the largest non-outlier value
Fig. 4Pre-scores of the Combined Model for each patient in training set
Fig. 5Receiver-operating characteristic analysis of prediction models for predicting NSCLC subtypes in training set
Performance of prediction models for predicting subtypes in NSCLC
| Clin-Lab Model | 0.887 (0.843–0.931) | 78.57 | 88.75 | 80.91 |
| PET-Rad Model | 0.835 (0.780–0.890) | 90.00 | 62.50 | 78.64 |
| CT-Rad Model | 0.784 (0.733–0.855) | 69.29 | 81.25 | 75.00 |
| Combined Model | 0.932 (0.900–0.964) | 96.25 | 95.00 | 84.09 |
| Clin-Lab Model | 0.860 (0.789–0.931) | 80.65 | 76.56 | 72.63 |
| PET-Rad Model | 0.740 (0.639–0.840) | 83.87 | 75.00 | 66.32 |
| CT-Rad Model | 0.710 (0.606–0.815) | 70.97 | 60.94 | 68.42 |
| Combined Model | 0.901 (0.840–0.957) | 93.55 | 81.25 | 85.95 |
Clin-Lab Clinical-Laboratory, PET-Rad positron emission tomography-radiomics, CT-Rad computed tomography-radiomics, AUC area under the receiver operating curve, CI confidence interval, Sen sensitivity, Spe specificity, Acc accuracy
Fig. 6Decision curve analysis (DCA) of prediction models in training set. The X-axis represented the threshold probability that was where the expected benefit of treatment was equal to the expected benefit of avoiding treatment. The Y-axis represented the net benefit. The gray and black line represented the hypothesis that all NSCLC patients were ADC and SCC, respectively
Fig. 7Developed the prediction nomogram based on Combined Model in training set. The probability of each predictor could be converted into scores according to the first scale “Points” at the top of the nomogram. After adding up the corresponding prediction probability at the bottom of the nomogram was the risk of ADC
Fig. 8Calibration curves of nomogram in training (a) and validation (b) sets, respectively. The X-axis represented the predicted probability estimated by nomogram, whereas the Y-axis represented the actual observed rates. The solid line represented the ideal reference line that predicted NSCLC subtypes corresponds to the actual outcome, the short-dashed line represented the apparent prediction of nomogram, and the long-dashed line represented the ideal estimation. Calibration curves showed the actual probability corresponded closely to the prediction of nomogram