Sarv Priya1, Amit Agarwal2, Caitlin Ward3, Thomas Locke1, Varun Monga4, Girish Bathla1. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, USA. 4. Division of Hematology, Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance texture analysis (MRTA) is a relatively new technique that can be a valuable addition to clinical and imaging parameters in predicting prognosis. In the present study, we investigated the efficacy of MRTA for glioblastoma survival using T1 contrast-enhanced (CE) images for texture analysis. METHODS: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of multiple machine learning models based on first-order histogram statistical parameters derived from T1-weighted CE images in the survival stratification of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Retrospective evaluation of 85 patients with GBM was performed. Thirty-six first-order texture parameters at six spatial scale filters (SSF) were extracted on the T1 CE axial images for the whole tumor using commercially available research software. Several machine learning classification models (in four broad categories: linear, penalized linear, non-linear, and ensemble classifiers) were evaluated to assess the survival prediction performance using optimal features. Principal component analysis was used prior to fitting the linear classifiers in order to reduce the dimensionality of the feature inputs. Fivefold cross-validation was used to partition the data iteratively into training and testing sets. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to assess the diagnostic performance. RESULTS: The neural network model was the highest performing model with the highest observed AUC (0.811) and cross-validated AUC (0.71). The most important variable was the age at diagnosis, with mean and mean of positive pixels (MPP) for SSF = 0 being the second and third most important, followed by skewness for SSF = 0 and SSF = 4. CONCLUSIONS: First-order texture features, when combined with age at presentation, show good accuracy in predicting GBM survival.
OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance texture analysis (MRTA) is a relatively new technique that can be a valuable addition to clinical and imaging parameters in predicting prognosis. In the present study, we investigated the efficacy of MRTA for glioblastoma survival using T1 contrast-enhanced (CE) images for texture analysis. METHODS: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of multiple machine learning models based on first-order histogram statistical parameters derived from T1-weighted CE images in the survival stratification of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Retrospective evaluation of 85 patients with GBM was performed. Thirty-six first-order texture parameters at six spatial scale filters (SSF) were extracted on the T1 CE axial images for the whole tumor using commercially available research software. Several machine learning classification models (in four broad categories: linear, penalized linear, non-linear, and ensemble classifiers) were evaluated to assess the survival prediction performance using optimal features. Principal component analysis was used prior to fitting the linear classifiers in order to reduce the dimensionality of the feature inputs. Fivefold cross-validation was used to partition the data iteratively into training and testing sets. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to assess the diagnostic performance. RESULTS: The neural network model was the highest performing model with the highest observed AUC (0.811) and cross-validated AUC (0.71). The most important variable was the age at diagnosis, with mean and mean of positive pixels (MPP) for SSF = 0 being the second and third most important, followed by skewness for SSF = 0 and SSF = 4. CONCLUSIONS: First-order texture features, when combined with age at presentation, show good accuracy in predicting GBM survival.
Authors: Martin A Lewis; Balaji Ganeshan; Anna Barnes; Sotirios Bisdas; Zane Jaunmuktane; Sebastian Brandner; Raymond Endozo; Ashley Groves; Stefanie C Thust Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Gabriel Chartrand; Phillip M Cheng; Eugene Vorontsov; Michal Drozdzal; Simon Turcotte; Christopher J Pal; Samuel Kadoury; An Tang Journal: Radiographics Date: 2017 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Manal Nicolasjilwan; Ying Hu; Chunhua Yan; Daoud Meerzaman; Chad A Holder; David Gutman; Rajan Jain; Rivka Colen; Daniel L Rubin; Pascal O Zinn; Scott N Hwang; Prashant Raghavan; Dima A Hammoud; Lisa M Scarpace; Tom Mikkelsen; James Chen; Olivier Gevaert; Kenneth Buetow; John Freymann; Justin Kirby; Adam E Flanders; Max Wintermark Journal: J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-07-02 Impact factor: 3.447
Authors: Leland S Hu; Shuluo Ning; Jennifer M Eschbacher; Leslie C Baxter; Nathan Gaw; Sara Ranjbar; Jonathan Plasencia; Amylou C Dueck; Sen Peng; Kris A Smith; Peter Nakaji; John P Karis; C Chad Quarles; Teresa Wu; Joseph C Loftus; Robert B Jenkins; Hugues Sicotte; Thomas M Kollmeyer; Brian P O'Neill; William Elmquist; Joseph M Hoxworth; David Frakes; Jann Sarkaria; Kristin R Swanson; Nhan L Tran; Jing Li; J Ross Mitchell Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2016-08-08 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Chintan Parmar; Patrick Grossmann; Derek Rietveld; Michelle M Rietbergen; Philippe Lambin; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2015-12-03 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Teodora Telecan; Iulia Andras; Nicolae Crisan; Lorin Giurgiu; Emanuel Darius Căta; Cosmin Caraiani; Andrei Lebovici; Bianca Boca; Zoltan Balint; Laura Diosan; Monica Lupsor-Platon Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-06-16