BACKGROUND: Cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) images are often collected with different imaging parameters, which may impact the calculated values of myocardial radiomic features. PURPOSE: To investigate the sensitivity of myocardial radiomic features to changes in imaging parameters in cardiac MR images. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: A total of 11 healthy participants/five patients. FIELD STRENGTH/ SEQUENCE: A 3 T/cine balanced steady-state free-precession, T1 -weighted spoiled gradient-echo, T2 -weighted turbo spin-echo, and quantitative T1 and T2 mapping. For each sequence, the flip angle, in-plane resolution, slice thickness, and parallel imaging technique were varied to study the sensitivity of radiomic features to alterations in imaging parameters. ASSESSMENT: Myocardial contours were manually delineated by experienced readers, and a total of 1023 radiomic features were extracted using PyRadiomics with 11 image filters and six feature families. STATISTICAL TESTS: Sensitivity was defined as the standardized mean difference (D effect size), and the robust features were defined at sensitivity < 0.2. Sensitivity analysis was performed on predefined sets of reproducible features. The analysis was performed using the entire cohort of 16 subejcts. RESULTS: 64% of radiomic features were robust (sensitivity < 0.2) to changes in any imaging parameter. In qualitative sequences, radiomic features were most sensitive to changes in in-plane spatial resolution (spatial resolution: 0.6 vs. flip angle: 0.19, parallel imaging: 0.18, slice thickness: 0.07; P < 0.01 for all); in quantitative sequences, radiomic features were least sensitive to changes in spatial resolution (spatial resolution: 0.07 vs. slice thickness: 0.16, flip angle: 0.24; P < 0.01 for all). In an individual feature level, no singular feature family/image filter was identified as robust (sensitivity < 0.2) across sequences; however, highly sensitive features were predominantly associated with high-frequency wavelet filters across all sequences (32/50 features). DATA CONCLUSION: In cardiac MR, a considerable number of radiomic features are sensitive to changes in sequence parameters. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) images are often collected with different imaging parameters, which may impact the calculated values of myocardial radiomic features. PURPOSE: To investigate the sensitivity of myocardial radiomic features to changes in imaging parameters in cardiac MR images. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. POPULATION: A total of 11 healthy participants/five patients. FIELD STRENGTH/ SEQUENCE: A 3 T/cine balanced steady-state free-precession, T1 -weighted spoiled gradient-echo, T2 -weighted turbo spin-echo, and quantitative T1 and T2 mapping. For each sequence, the flip angle, in-plane resolution, slice thickness, and parallel imaging technique were varied to study the sensitivity of radiomic features to alterations in imaging parameters. ASSESSMENT: Myocardial contours were manually delineated by experienced readers, and a total of 1023 radiomic features were extracted using PyRadiomics with 11 image filters and six feature families. STATISTICAL TESTS: Sensitivity was defined as the standardized mean difference (D effect size), and the robust features were defined at sensitivity < 0.2. Sensitivity analysis was performed on predefined sets of reproducible features. The analysis was performed using the entire cohort of 16 subejcts. RESULTS: 64% of radiomic features were robust (sensitivity < 0.2) to changes in any imaging parameter. In qualitative sequences, radiomic features were most sensitive to changes in in-plane spatial resolution (spatial resolution: 0.6 vs. flip angle: 0.19, parallel imaging: 0.18, slice thickness: 0.07; P < 0.01 for all); in quantitative sequences, radiomic features were least sensitive to changes in spatial resolution (spatial resolution: 0.07 vs. slice thickness: 0.16, flip angle: 0.24; P < 0.01 for all). In an individual feature level, no singular feature family/image filter was identified as robust (sensitivity < 0.2) across sequences; however, highly sensitive features were predominantly associated with high-frequency wavelet filters across all sequences (32/50 features). DATA CONCLUSION: In cardiac MR, a considerable number of radiomic features are sensitive to changes in sequence parameters. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.
Authors: Bettina Baessler; Christian Luecke; Julia Lurz; Karin Klingel; Arijit Das; Maximilian von Roeder; Suzanne de Waha-Thiele; Christian Besler; Karl-Philipp Rommel; David Maintz; Matthias Gutberlet; Holger Thiele; Philipp Lurz Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Yoganand Balagurunathan; Yuhua Gu; Hua Wang; Virendra Kumar; Olya Grove; Sam Hawkins; Jongphil Kim; Dmitry B Goldgof; Lawrence O Hall; Robert A Gatenby; Robert J Gillies Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 4.243
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: Michael Schwier; Joost van Griethuysen; Mark G Vangel; Steve Pieper; Sharon Peled; Clare Tempany; Hugo J W L Aerts; Ron Kikinis; Fiona M Fennessy; Andriy Fedorov Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Hugo J W L Aerts; Emmanuel Rios Velazquez; Ralph T H Leijenaar; Chintan Parmar; Patrick Grossmann; Sara Carvalho; Sara Cavalho; Johan Bussink; René Monshouwer; Benjamin Haibe-Kains; Derek Rietveld; Frank Hoebers; Michelle M Rietbergen; C René Leemans; Andre Dekker; John Quackenbush; Robert J Gillies; Philippe Lambin Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2014-06-03 Impact factor: 14.919