| Literature DB >> 34976790 |
Rong Niu1,2, Jianxiong Gao1,2, Xiaoliang Shao1,2, Jianfeng Wang1,2, Zhenxing Jiang3, Yunmei Shi1,2, Feifei Zhang1,2, Yuetao Wang1,2, Xiaonan Shao1,2.
Abstract
To investigate whether the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of 18F-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET imaging can increase the diagnostic efficiency of CT radiomics-based prediction model in differentiating benign and malignant pulmonary ground-glass nodules (GGNs). We retrospectively collected 190 GGNs from 165 patients who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT examination from January 2012 to March 2020. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to select GGNs with similar baseline characteristics. LIFEx software was used to extract 49 CT radiomic features, and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) algorithm was used to select parameters and establish the Rad-score. Logistic regression analysis was performed combined with semantic features to construct a CT radiomics model, which was combined with SUVmax to establish the PET + CT radiomics model. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was used to compare the diagnostic efficacy of different models. After PSM at 1:4, 190 GGNs were divided into benign group (n = 23) and adenocarcinoma group (n = 92). After texture analysis, the Rad-score with three CT texture features was constructed for each nodule. Compared with the Rad-score and CT radiomics model (AUC: 0.704 (95%CI: 0.562-0.845) and 0.908 (95%CI: 0.842-0.975), respectively), PET + CT radiomics model had the best diagnostic efficiency (AUC: 0.940, 95%CI: 0.889-0.990), and there was significant difference between each two of them (P = 0.001-0.030). SUVmax can effectively improve CT radiomics model performance in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant GGNs. PET + CT radiomics might become a noninvasive and reliable method for differentiating of GGNs.Entities:
Keywords: fluorodeoxyglucose F18; lung adenocarcinoma; positron emission tomography-computed tomography; radiomics; standardized uptake value
Year: 2021 PMID: 34976790 PMCID: PMC8718929 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.727094
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Figure 1Flow chart of the study. GGN = ground-glass nodule, PSM = propensity score matching.
General data of GGNs in benign group and adenocarcinoma group before and after PSM.
| Before matching | After matching | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benign (n = 23) | Adenocarcinoma (n = 167) |
| Benign (n = 23) | Adenocarcinoma (n = 92) |
| |
| Age (years) | 55.8 ± 10.5 | 60.8 ± 8.7 | 0.013 | 55.8 ± 10.5 | 57.4 ± 8.9 | 0.477 |
| Sex | 0.002 | 0.428 | ||||
| Female | 9 (39.1%) | 120 (71.9%) | 9 (39.1%) | 47 (51.1) | ||
| Male | 14 (60.9%) | 47 (28.1%) | 14 (60.9%) | 45 (48.9) | ||
| History of smoking | 0.039 | 0.800 | ||||
| No | 15 (65.2%) | 139 (83.2%) | 15 (65.2%) | 65 (70.7) | ||
| Yes | 8 (34.8%) | 28 (16.8%) | 8 (34.8%) | 27 (29.3) | ||
| Fasting blood glucose (mmol/L) | 6.8 ± 1.9 | 6.7 ± 1.7 | 0.960 | 6.8 ± 1.9 | 6.65 ± 1.69 | 0.772 |
| GGN number grouping | 0.448 | 1.000 | ||||
| Solitary | 15 (65.2%) | 95 (56.9%) | 15 (65.2%) | 58 (63) | ||
| Multifocal | 8 (34.8%) | 72 (43.1%) | 8 (34.8%) | 34 (37) | ||
Results in the table: Mean ± SD/N (%).
Comparison of CT semantic features and SUVmax of GGNs between benign group and adenocarcinoma group after PSM.
| Features | Benign (n = 23) | Adenocarcinoma (n = 92) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | 0.625 | ||
| pGGN | 7 (30.4%) | 33 (35.9%) | |
| mGGN | 16 (69.6%) | 59 (64.1%) | |
| Location | 1.000 | ||
| Peripheral | 22 (95.7%) | 88 (95.7%) | |
| Central | 1 (4.3%) | 4 (4.3%) | |
| Shape | 0.922 | ||
| Round/oval | 15 (65.2%) | 59 (64.1%) | |
| Irregular | 8 (34.8%) | 33 (35.9%) | |
| Margin | 0.111 | ||
| Smooth | 16 (69.6%) | 47 (51.1%) | |
| Lobulated | 7 (30.4%) | 45 (48.9%) | |
| Abnormal bronchus sign | 0.080 | ||
| No | 10 (43.5%) | 23 (25.0%) | |
| Yes | 13 (56.5%) | 69 (75.0%) | |
| Vacuole sign | 0.904 | ||
| No | 19 (82.6%) | 75 (81.5%) | |
| Yes | 4 (17.4%) | 17 (18.5%) | |
| Pleural indentation | <0.001 | ||
| No | 19 (82.6%) | 40 (43.5%) | |
| Yes | 4 (17.4%) | 52 (56.5%) | |
| Vascular convergence | 0.559 | ||
| No | 2 (8.7%) | 5 (5.4%) | |
| Yes | 21 (91.3%) | 87 (94.6%) | |
| SUVmax | 2.9 (1.4-6.9) | 1.8 (1.1-3.0) | 0.024 |
Results in the table: Median (Q1-Q3)/N (%).
Comparison of diagnostic efficiency of different models.
| Model | AUC (95%CI) | Best threshold | Sensitivity | Specificity | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rad-score (3 mm) | 0.634 (0.499-0.768) | 2.162 | 0.707 | 0.609 | 0.687 |
| Rad-score (1 mm) | 0.704 (0.562-0.845) | 10.920 | 0.852 | 0.609 | 0.779 |
| CT radiomics model (3 mm) | 0.794 (0.704-0.884) | 0.903 | 0.794 | 0.739 | 0.783 |
| CT radiomics model (1 mm) | 0.908 (0.842-0.975) | 1.242 | 0.815 | 0.956 | 0.857 |
| PET + CT radiomics model | 0.940 (0.889-0.990) | 1.931 | 0.815 | 1.000 | 0.870 |
Figure 2Comparison of ROC curves between Rad-score and radiomics models with different CT reconstruction slice thickness.
Figure 3The nomogram of PET + CT radiomics model for differentiating benign and malignant GGNs and two examples. (A) Nomogram of PET + CT radiomics model. (B, C) A 31-year-old man with a ground-glass nodule (GGN) on the right upper lung lobe. CT image (B) and PET/CT fusion image (C) show that nodule with abnormal bronchus sign (27 points), and no pleural indentation was identified (0 points). Rad-score (1 mm) was 10.7 (20 points), maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was 8.1 (38 points). The total points were 85 points. The risk of adenocarcinoma for this nodule was < 10%. Postoperative pathologic findings indicated granuloma. (D, E) A 61-year-old man with GGN on the right upper lung lobe. CT image (D) and PET/CT fusion image (E) show that nodule with abnormal bronchus sign (27 points) and pleural indentation sign (23 points). Rad-score (1 mm) was 11.3 (38 points), SUVmax was 1.1 (71 points). The total points were 163 points. The risk of adenocarcinoma for this nodule was > 90%. Postoperative pathologic findings indicated invasive adenocarcinoma.
Figure 4Comparison of ROC curves of Rad-score, CT radiomics model, and PET + CT radiomics model of 1 mm CT.