| Literature DB >> 34178617 |
Yao Ai1, Jindi Zhang2, Juebin Jin3, Ji Zhang1, Haiyan Zhu2,4, Xiance Jin1,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is urgent need for an accurate preoperative prediction of metastatic status to optimize treatment for patients with ovarian cancer (OC). The feasibility of predicting the metastatic status based on radiomics features from preoperative computed tomography (CT) images alone or combined with clinical factors were investigated.Entities:
Keywords: CA125; computed tomography; metastasis; ovarian cancer; radiomics
Year: 2021 PMID: 34178617 PMCID: PMC8222738 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.610742
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Figure 1The flowchart of the case identification process.
Figure 2A typical ovarian tumor segmentation on CT images.
Characteristics of patients.
| Characteristics | Metastasis (-) ( | Metastasis (+) ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), mean (range) | 46.9 (15-76) | 57.3 (26-79) | <0.001 |
| FIGO stage | <0.001 | ||
| I | 29 | 0 | |
| II | 1 | 13 | |
| III | 0 | 57 | |
| IV | 0 | 1 | |
| Histological type | <0.001 | ||
| Epithelial | 19 | 67 | |
| Non-epithelial | 11 | 4 | |
| Vascular invasion | 0.016 | ||
| Yes | 0 | 12 | |
| No | 30 | 59 |
Categorical variables were compared by using the chi-square test or Fisher exact test. Continues variables were compared by using the Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test.
FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
The main metastatic sites and number of metastases of enrolled patients with ovarian cancer.
| The main site of metastasis | Uterus | Vermix | Intestinal canal | Omentum majus | Lymph nodes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Numbers of metastases | 18 | 9 | 30 | 30 | 13 |
| Percentage | 25.4% | 12.7% | 42.3% | 42.3% | 18.3% |
Univariate analysis of preoperative clinical factors associated with metastasis.
| Characteristics | Training cohort |
| Validation cohort |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metastasis (–) ( | Metastasis (+) ( | Metastasis (-) ( | Metastasis (+) ( | |||
| Age (years), | 0.012* | 0.018* | ||||
| Mean (range) | 48.4 (23-76) | 57.9 (29-79) | 43.8 (15-61) | 56.1 (26-70) | ||
| Weight (kg) | 0.92 | 0.06 | ||||
| Mean (range) | 57.0 (47-75) | 56.9 (42-76) | 60.1 (51-66) | 57.2 (43-81) | ||
| TCHO (mmol/L) | 0.59 | 0.25 | ||||
| ≤5.2 | 11 | 31 | 4 | 13 | ||
| >5.2 | 9 | 19 | 6 | 8 | ||
| TG (mmol/L) | 0.73 | 0.70 | ||||
| ≤1.7 | 14 | 37 | 7 | 16 | ||
| >1.7 | 6 | 13 | 3 | 5 | ||
| HDLC (mmol/L) | 0.11 | 0.74 | ||||
| ≤2 | 19 | 50 | 9 | 18 | ||
| >2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | ||
| LDLC (mmol/L) | 0.70 | 0.05 | ||||
| ≤3.12 | 13 | 30 | 4 | 16 | ||
| >3.12 | 7 | 20 | 6 | 5 | ||
| Blood sugar (mmol/L) | 0.88 | 0.21 | ||||
| ≤6.1 | 10 | 26 | 8 | 12 | ||
| >6.1 | 10 | 24 | 2 | 9 | ||
| CA125 (U/ml) | < 0.001* | 0.001* | ||||
| ≤35 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 1 | ||
| >35 | 13 | 48 | 4 | 20 | ||
| CEA (ng/ml) | 0.38 | 0.95 | ||||
| ≤5 | 15 | 32 | 8 | 17 | ||
| >5 | 5 | 18 | 2 | 4 | ||
*P value < 0.05; Categorical variables were compared by using the chi-square test. Continues variables were compared by using the Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test;
TCHO, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; HDLC, high density lipoprotein; LDLC, low density lipoprotein; CA125, carcinoma antigen 125; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen.
Figure 3Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves of three models to discriminate metastasis in preoperative ovarian cancer patients. (A) The area under curves (AUCs) of radiomics signature, clinical factor model, and combined model were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74-0.93), 0.70 (95% CI, 0.58-0.83) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80-0.96) in the training cohort, respectively. (B) The AUCs of the radiomics signature, clinical model, and combined model were 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66-0.98), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.67-1.00), and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99) in the validation cohort, respectively.
Predictive performance of the radiomics signature and the two prediction models for the discrimination of metastasis in ovarian cancer.
| Models | Training cohort | Validation cohort | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEN | SPE | AUC (95% CI) | SEN | SPE | AUC (95% CI) | |
| Radiomics model | 0.76 | 0.80 | 0.84 (0.74-0.93) | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.82 (0.66-0.98) |
| Clinical model | 0.84 | 0.65 | 0.70 (0.58-0.83) | 0.71 | 0.80 | 0.83 (0.67-0.95) |
| Combined model | 0.86 | 0.85 | 0.88 (0.80-0.96) | 0.81 | 0.80 | 0.86 (0.72-0.99) |
SEN, sensitivity; SPE, specificity; AUC, are under curve; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval.
Figure 4Radiomic score for each patient in the training and validation cohorts of radiomic signature (A, D); of clinical model (B, E); of combined model (C, F).