S Gutta1, J Acharya2, M S Shiroishi2, D Hwang2, K S Nayak3,2. 1. From the Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (S.G., K.S.N.), Viterbi School of Engineering sgutta@usc.edu. 2. Department of Radiology (J.A., M.S.S., D.H., K.S.N.), Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 3. From the Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (S.G., K.S.N.), Viterbi School of Engineering.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accurate determination of glioma grade leads to improved treatment planning. The criterion standard for glioma grading is invasive tissue sampling. Recently, radiomic features have shown excellent potential in glioma-grade prediction. These features may not fully exploit the underlying information in MR images. The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of features learned by a convolutional neural network compared with standard radiomic features for grade prediction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 237 patients with gliomas were included in this study. All images were resampled, registered, skull-stripped, and segmented to extract the tumors. The learned features from the trained convolutional neural network were used for grade prediction. The performance of the proposed method was compared with standard machine learning approaches, support vector machine, random forests, and gradient boosting trained with radiomic features. RESULTS: The experimental results demonstrate that using learned features extracted from the convolutional neural network achieves an average accuracy of 87%, outperforming the methods considering radiomic features alone. The top-performing machine learning model is gradient boosting with an average accuracy of 64%. Thus, there is a 23% improvement in accuracy, and it is an efficient technique for grade prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Convolutional neural networks are able to learn discriminating features automatically, and these features provide added value for grading gliomas. The proposed framework may provide substantial improvement in glioma-grade prediction; however, further validation is needed.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Accurate determination of glioma grade leads to improved treatment planning. The criterion standard for glioma grading is invasive tissue sampling. Recently, radiomic features have shown excellent potential in glioma-grade prediction. These features may not fully exploit the underlying information in MR images. The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of features learned by a convolutional neural network compared with standard radiomic features for grade prediction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 237 patients with gliomas were included in this study. All images were resampled, registered, skull-stripped, and segmented to extract the tumors. The learned features from the trained convolutional neural network were used for grade prediction. The performance of the proposed method was compared with standard machine learning approaches, support vector machine, random forests, and gradient boosting trained with radiomic features. RESULTS: The experimental results demonstrate that using learned features extracted from the convolutional neural network achieves an average accuracy of 87%, outperforming the methods considering radiomic features alone. The top-performing machine learning model is gradient boosting with an average accuracy of 64%. Thus, there is a 23% improvement in accuracy, and it is an efficient technique for grade prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Convolutional neural networks are able to learn discriminating features automatically, and these features provide added value for grading gliomas. The proposed framework may provide substantial improvement in glioma-grade prediction; however, further validation is needed.
Authors: Michael Weller; Martin van den Bent; Jörg C Tonn; Roger Stupp; Matthias Preusser; Elizabeth Cohen-Jonathan-Moyal; Roger Henriksson; Emilie Le Rhun; Carmen Balana; Olivier Chinot; Martin Bendszus; Jaap C Reijneveld; Frederick Dhermain; Pim French; Christine Marosi; Colin Watts; Ingela Oberg; Geoffrey Pilkington; Brigitta G Baumert; Martin J B Taphoorn; Monika Hegi; Manfred Westphal; Guido Reifenberger; Riccardo Soffietti; Wolfgang Wick Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-05-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Joost J M van Griethuysen; Andriy Fedorov; Chintan Parmar; Ahmed Hosny; Nicole Aucoin; Vivek Narayan; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin; Steve Pieper; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Johannes Haubold; René Hosch; Vicky Parmar; Martin Glas; Nika Guberina; Onofrio Antonio Catalano; Daniela Pierscianek; Karsten Wrede; Cornelius Deuschl; Michael Forsting; Felix Nensa; Nils Flaschel; Lale Umutlu Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 6.639