Literature DB >> 33502678

Machine learning-based differentiation between multiple sclerosis and glioma WHO II°-IV° using O-(2-[18F] fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography.

Sied Kebir1,2,3, Laurèl Rauschenbach3,4, Martin Glas5,6,7,8, Manuel Weber9, Lazaros Lazaridis1,2,3, Teresa Schmidt1,2, Kathy Keyvani10, Niklas Schäfer11, Asma Milia12, Lale Umutlu13, Daniela Pierscianek4, Martin Stuschke14, Michael Forsting13, Ulrich Sure4, Christoph Kleinschnitz15, Gerald Antoch16, Patrick M Colletti17, Domenico Rubello18, Ken Herrmann9, Ulrich Herrlinger11, Björn Scheffler2,3, Ralph A Bundschuh19.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to test the diagnostic significance of FET-PET imaging combined with machine learning for the differentiation between multiple sclerosis (MS) and glioma II°-IV°.
METHODS: Our database was screened for patients in whom FET-PET imaging was performed for the diagnostic workup of newly diagnosed lesions evident on MRI and suggestive of glioma. Among those, we identified patients with histologically confirmed glioma II°-IV°, and those who later turned out to have MS. For each group, tumor-to-brain ratio (TBR) derived features of FET were determined. A support vector machine (SVM) based machine learning algorithm was constructed to enhance classification ability, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis with area under the curve (AUC) metric served to ascertain model performance.
RESULTS: A total of 41 patients met selection criteria, including seven patients with MS and 34 patients with glioma. TBR values were significantly higher in the glioma group (TBRmax glioma vs. MS: p = 0.002; TBRmean glioma vs. MS: p = 0.014). In a subgroup analysis, TBR values significantly differentiated between MS and glioblastoma (TBRmax glioblastoma vs. MS: p = 0.0003, TBRmean glioblastoma vs. MS: p = 0.0003) and between MS and oligodendroglioma (ODG) (TBRmax ODG vs. MS: p = 0.003; TBRmean ODG vs. MS: p = 0.01). The ability to differentiate between MS and glioma II°-IV° increased from 0.79 using standard TBR analysis to 0.94 using a SVM based machine learning algorithm.
CONCLUSIONS: FET-PET imaging may help differentiate MS from glioma II°-IV° and SVM based machine learning approaches can enhance classification performance.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Artificial intelligence; Glioma; Multiple sclerosis; PET; Positron emission tomography

Year:  2021        PMID: 33502678     DOI: 10.1007/s11060-021-03701-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurooncol        ISSN: 0167-594X            Impact factor:   4.130


  30 in total

1.  Atlas of Multiple Sclerosis 2013: A growing global problem with widespread inequity.

Authors:  Paul Browne; Dhia Chandraratna; Ceri Angood; Helen Tremlett; Chris Baker; Bruce V Taylor; Alan J Thompson
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 9.910

2.  Inflammatory demyelinating disease mimicking malignant glioma.

Authors:  Toshiaki Hayashi; Toshihiro Kumabe; Hidefumi Jokura; Kazuo Fujihara; Yusei Shiga; Mika Watanabe; Shu-ichi Higano; Reizo Shirane
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 3.  Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria.

Authors:  Alan J Thompson; Brenda L Banwell; Frederik Barkhof; William M Carroll; Timothy Coetzee; Giancarlo Comi; Jorge Correale; Franz Fazekas; Massimo Filippi; Mark S Freedman; Kazuo Fujihara; Steven L Galetta; Hans Peter Hartung; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Ruth Ann Marrie; Aaron E Miller; David H Miller; Xavier Montalban; Ellen M Mowry; Per Soelberg Sorensen; Mar Tintoré; Anthony L Traboulsee; Maria Trojano; Bernard M J Uitdehaag; Sandra Vukusic; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian G Weinshenker; Stephen C Reingold; Jeffrey A Cohen
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 44.182

Review 4.  Pseudotumoral demyelinating lesions: diagnostic approach and long-term outcome.

Authors:  Todd A Hardy
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 5.710

5.  Inaugural tumor-like multiple sclerosis: clinical presentation and medium-term outcome in 87 patients.

Authors:  G Balloy; J Pelletier; L Suchet; C Lebrun; M Cohen; P Vermersch; H Zephir; E Duhin; O Gout; R Deschamps; E Le Page; G Edan; P Labauge; C Carra-Dallieres; L Rumbach; E Berger; P Lejeune; P Devos; J-B N'Kendjuo; M Coustans; E Auffray-Calvier; B Daumas-Duport; L Michel; F Lefrere; D A Laplaud; C Brosset; P Derkinderen; J de Seze; S Wiertlewski
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2018-07-27       Impact factor: 4.849

6.  Astrocytoma-like multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  E E Pakos; P G Tsekeris; K Chatzidimou; A C Goussia; S Markoula; M I Argyropoulou; E G Pitouli; S Konitsiotis
Journal:  Clin Neurol Neurosurg       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.876

7.  18F-fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography for the differential diagnosis of tumefactive multiple sclerosis versus glioma: A case report.

Authors:  Sied Kebir; Florian C Gaertner; Marcus Mueller; Michael Nelles; Matthias Simon; Niklas Schäfer; Moritz Stuplich; Christina Schaub; Michael Niessen; Frederic Mack; Ralph Bundschuh; Susanne Greschus; Markus Essler; Martin Glas; Ulrich Herrlinger
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 2.967

8.  Distinguishing tumefactive demyelinating lesions from glioma or central nervous system lymphoma: added value of unenhanced CT compared with conventional contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Dae Sik Kim; Dong Gyu Na; Keon Ha Kim; Ji-Hoon Kim; Eunhee Kim; Bo La Yun; Kee-Hyun Chang
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Surgical resection versus watchful waiting in low-grade gliomas.

Authors:  A S Jakola; A J Skjulsvik; K S Myrmel; K Sjåvik; G Unsgård; S H Torp; K Aaberg; T Berg; H Y Dai; K Johnsen; R Kloster; O Solheim
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  Joint EANM/EANO/RANO practice guidelines/SNMMI procedure standards for imaging of gliomas using PET with radiolabelled amino acids and [18F]FDG: version 1.0.

Authors:  Ian Law; Nathalie L Albert; Javier Arbizu; Ronald Boellaard; Alexander Drzezga; Norbert Galldiks; Christian la Fougère; Karl-Josef Langen; Egesta Lopci; Val Lowe; Jonathan McConathy; Harald H Quick; Bernhard Sattler; David M Schuster; Jörg-Christian Tonn; Michael Weller
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 9.236

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  What Does PET Imaging Bring to Neuro-Oncology in 2022? A Review.

Authors:  Jules Tianyu Zhang-Yin; Antoine Girard; Marc Bertaux
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 2.  Applications of Artificial Intelligence Based on Medical Imaging in Glioma: Current State and Future Challenges.

Authors:  Jiaona Xu; Yuting Meng; Kefan Qiu; Win Topatana; Shijie Li; Chao Wei; Tianwen Chen; Mingyu Chen; Zhongxiang Ding; Guozhong Niu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-27       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  Deep learning identified glioblastoma subtypes based on internal genomic expression ranks.

Authors:  Xing-Gang Mao; Xiao-Yan Xue; Ling Wang; Wei Lin; Xiang Zhang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  Feasibility on the Use of Radiomics Features of 11[C]-MET PET/CT in Central Nervous System Tumours: Preliminary Results on Potential Grading Discrimination Using a Machine Learning Model.

Authors:  Giorgio Russo; Alessandro Stefano; Pierpaolo Alongi; Albert Comelli; Barbara Catalfamo; Cristina Mantarro; Costanza Longo; Roberto Altieri; Francesco Certo; Sebastiano Cosentino; Maria Gabriella Sabini; Selene Richiusa; Giuseppe Maria Vincenzo Barbagallo; Massimo Ippolito
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2021-12-12       Impact factor: 3.677

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.