| Literature DB >> 34262646 |
Christopher Kolios1,2,3,4, Lakshmanan Sannachi1,2,3,4, Archya Dasgupta1,2,4, Harini Suraweera1,2, Daniel DiCenzo1,2, Gregory Stanisz1,3, Arjun Sahgal2,4, Frances Wright5,6, Nicole Look-Hong5,6, Belinda Curpen7,8, Ali Sadeghi-Naini9, Maureen Trudeau10,11, Sonal Gandhi10,11, Michael C Kolios12, Gregory J Czarnota1,2,3,4,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radiomics involving quantitative analysis of imaging has shown promises in oncology to serve as non-invasive biomarkers. We investigated whether pre-treatment T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used to predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; biomarkers; breast cancer; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; radiomics
Year: 2021 PMID: 34262646 PMCID: PMC8274727 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.28002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Patient, disease, and treatment characteristics (n = 102)
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| 51 ± 11 years |
|
| 5.2 ± 2.8 cm |
|
| |
| Invasive Ductal Carcinoma: 87% | |
| Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: 6% | |
| Other: 7% | |
|
| |
| Grade 1: 7% | |
| Grade 2: 43% | |
| Grade 3: 46% | |
| Unavailable: 4% | |
|
| |
| HR+/HER2-: 41% | |
| HR+/HER2+: 20% | |
| HR-/HER2+: 14% | |
| Triple-negative: 25% | |
|
| |
| AC-T (51%) | |
| FEC-D (41%) | |
| Others (8%) | |
|
| 1.9 ± 4.1 cm |
Abbreviations: HR: Hormone receptor; HER2: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; AC-T: doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel; FEC-D: 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, and docetaxel.
Figure 1The MRI, quantized tumor ROI, and texture feature images for a typical NR and R.
Includes (A) MRI sagittal view before treatment, (B) the MRI ROI quantized to 16 grey levels with both the ROI core and a margin of 10 pixels outlined, and feature images for (C) MAX, (D) HOM, (E) ENE, and (F) COR. The solid lines around the tumor core in the feature images differentiate the cores from the margins. Scale bars on the top panel correspond to 1 cm.
Figure 2Boxplot with an overlayed scatterplot of the distributions of NR and R patient texture feature values calculated with only the tumor core, a quantization of 256 grey levels, and a pixel distance of 1.
Figure 3Boxplot with an overlayed scatterplot of the distributions of NR and R patient texture feature values calculated with only tumor margin, a quantization of 256 grey levels, and a pixel distance of 1.
Optimal patient response classifier parameter details, including texture features used
| Classifier | Sensitivity
| Specificity
| Accuarcy
| AUC | F1-Score | Features | ROI Selection Method | Quantization | Pixel distance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 84 | 70 | 73 | 0.74 | 0.76 | MEA, VAR, STD | Margin (15 pixels) | 128 | 1 |
|
| 74 | 70 | 70 | 0.75 | 0.72 | MEA, STD | Core | 32 | 5 |
|
| 74 | 70 | 71 | 0.76 | 0.72 | MEA, STD, ENT, MAX | Core | 32 | 5 |
|
| 63 | 93 | 87 | 0.78 | 0.75 | HOM, ASM | Margin (10 pixels) | 128 | 1 |
Abbreviations: AUC: Area under curve; ROI: Region of interest; MEA: Mean; VAR: Variance; STD: Standard deviation; ENT: Entropy: MAX: Maximum; HOM: Homogeneity; ASM: Angular second moment.
Figure 4Bar diagram showing classifier result values (optimized for maximum F1-Score).
The performances of the four classifiers in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy are presented.
Figure 5Receiver operator characteristics curve for the optimal response classifiers, optimized for maximum F1-Score.
The AUCs for each classifier are reported in the legend.