| Literature DB >> 34911546 |
M R Tomaszewski1,2, K Latifi3, E Boyer4, R F Palm4, I El Naqa5, E G Moros3, S E Hoffe4, S A Rosenberg4, J M Frakes4, R J Gillies6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Magnetic Resonance Image guided Stereotactic body radiotherapy (MRgRT) is an emerging technology that is increasingly used in treatment of visceral cancers, such as pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Given the variable response rates and short progression times of PDAC, there is an unmet clinical need for a method to assess early RT response that may allow better prescription personalization. We hypothesize that quantitative image feature analysis (radiomics) of the longitudinal MR scans acquired before and during MRgRT may be used to extract information related to early treatment response.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34911546 PMCID: PMC8672552 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01957-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Patient information
| Age (years) | 66 (60–72) |
| Sex | |
| Female | 12 (46%) |
| Male | 14 (54%) |
| Histology | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 26 (100%) |
| Tumor location | |
| Head | 21 (81%) |
| Body | 4 (15%) |
| Tail | 1 (4%) |
| Resectability status (at diagnosis) | |
| Borderline resectable | 11 (42%) |
| Locally advanced | 15 (58%) |
| Induction chemotherapy | |
| FOLFRINOX | 16 (62%) |
| Gem/Abraxane | 6 (23%) |
| FOLFRINOX and Gem/Abraxane | 4 (15%) |
| Time to progression (days) | 120 (60–180) |
| Follow-up (days) | 200 (111–289) |
Number quoted is the number of patients in each category for categorical variables, and median value for numerical variables, while the number in brackets signifies percentage of all patients in the category and 25th to 75th percentile range respectively. Follow-up time is quoted for patients who did not progress as time to censoring
Feature quantification
Divided by histogram (green) and texture (blue), names of all quantified features (second column), corresponding p value of their association with Progression Free survival (column 3) pre and post (in brackets) multiplicity correction, and the Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC) values describing the spatial stability of each feature. P values pre-multiplicity correction are quoted to show the heterogeneity and dynamic range of associations
Fig. 1Linear image normalization removes global intensity variation. Images before (top row) and after (bottom row) normalization by division by median kidney signal are displayed. Strong global raw signal intensity changes between simulation (A) and first fraction (B) scan (when no treatment was administered) were observed, indicative of technical drift (no normalization, top row). This effect can be reduced by normalization (bottom row). The systematic correlation in image intensity changes observed between the tumor and rest of the abdomen (C), dominating the tumor intensity changes, is removed following image normalization (D)
Fig. 2Histogram skewness change during treatment predicts progression free survival. Division of patients based on Skewness value ratio between 5th (F5) and first (F1) fraction image enables identification of high- and low progression risk groups (A). Kaplan–Maier analysis of progression free survival (PFS) within each group confirms a significant difference (B)
Fig. 3Robust analysis requires high spatial stability of features. Heat map (A) shows the distribution of Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC) for all quantified radiomic features, describing the robustness of the features to small changes in positions of the Region of Interest (ROI), calculated through translation of the ROI 1.5 mm in x and y. Results of this quantification for representative features with high CCC (Skewness, B) and lower CCC (C) are presented, showing a tighter distribution for repeated measurements for higher CCC. Bars denote distance from min to max value of the feature when ROI is shifted, with one bar for each patient
Fig. 4Skewness changes during treatment are not clearly visible in the images. Histograms of the GTV signal intensity distributions at first (black) and last (red) fraction are shown in (A) for representative low risk (left) and high risk (right) patients. Axial slices through the body for these patients at first and last (5th) fraction are shown in (B) and (C) respectively, outlining the tumor cross-section in dotted white line. Magnified tumor area is shown in insets.