| Literature DB >> 35117836 |
Jian Wang1, Rongjie Liu2, Yu Zhao3, Chonnipa Nantavithya4, Hesham Elhalawani5, Hongtu Zhu6, Abdallah Sherif Radwan Mohamed5, Clifton David Fuller5, Danita Kannarunimit4, Pei Yang7, Hong Zhu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To establish a predictive model for the fibrotic level of neck muscles after radiotherapy by using radiomic features extracted from the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after radiotherapy and planning computed tomography (CT) in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.Entities:
Keywords: Fibrosis; machine learning; nasopharyngeal carcinoma; quality of life
Year: 2020 PMID: 35117836 PMCID: PMC8798125 DOI: 10.21037/tcr-20-751
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Cancer Res ISSN: 2218-676X Impact factor: 1.241
Figure 1A workflow to produce a predictive model. These steps include gathering a set of patient images, segmentation of the region of interest (ROI) including four muscle, extracting a set of radiomics features from these ROIs, generating a predictive model and then perform the statistical analysis.
Figure 2Flow diagram for patient selection in our study.
Patient’s clinical and dosimetric parameters
| Clinical factors | N=186 | Training cohort | Testing cohort | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mild | Moderate | Severe | P | Mild | Moderate | Severe | P | |||
| SEX | 0.972 | 0.645 | ||||||||
| Male | 136 | 67 | 24 | 18 | 17 | 6 | 4 | |||
| Female | 50 | 23 | 12 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 2 | |||
| AGE (years) | 0.005 | 0.273 | ||||||||
| ≥65 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |||
| <65 | 178 | 89 | 34 | 19 | 22 | 8 | 6 | |||
| T stage | 0.935 | 0.852 | ||||||||
| T1 | 19 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |||
| T2 | 59 | 28 | 14 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 1 | |||
| T3 | 60 | 30 | 10 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 3 | |||
| T4 | 48 | 22 | 9 | 7 | 7 | 2 | 1 | |||
| N stage | 0.398 | 0.714 | ||||||||
| N0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| N1 | 28 | 13 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | |||
| N2 | 112 | 58 | 20 | 11 | 14 | 5 | 4 | |||
| N3 | 42 | 18 | 9 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 0 | |||
| M stage | 0.03 | 0.524 | ||||||||
| M0 | 178 | 88 | 36 | 18 | 22 | 9 | 5 | |||
| M1 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
| Clinical stage | 0.222 | 0.672 | ||||||||
| I | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |||
| II | 11 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| III | 91 | 45 | 18 | 10 | 11 | 4 | 3 | |||
| IVa | 74 | 37 | 15 | 7 | 9 | 4 | 2 | |||
| IVb | 8 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | |||
| Concurrent chemoradiotherapy | 0.641 | 0.687 | ||||||||
| No | 17 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Yes | 169 | 81 | 32 | 21 | 21 | 8 | 6 | |||
The 7th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging manual was used to stage the patients.
Categorization of 186 patients according to muscle fibrosis in the neck after treatment
| Level | Conditions (meet any of the following) |
|---|---|
| Mild | (I) Rating: 0–4 points |
| (II) No facial edema | |
| (III) No upper limb pains | |
| (IV) Neck activity is unrestricted | |
| Moderate | (I) Rating: 4–6 points |
| (II) Late facial edema (regress within 3 months) | |
| (III) Mild upper limb pain (no treatment) | |
| (IV) Neck activity is slightly limited | |
| Severe | (I) Rating: 7–10 points |
| (II) Late facial edema, lasting more than 3 months | |
| (III) Severe upper limb pain, or needing medical intervention | |
| (IV) Neck activity is significantly limited or duration >6 months |
Categorization into a specific group required the patient to meet any of the above criteria.
The features used in this study and related preprocessing methods
| Category | Feature | Preprocess |
|---|---|---|
| Gradient Orient Histogram | Inter Quartile Range | Resample Voxel Size |
| Kurtosis | ||
| Mean Absolute Deviation | ||
| Median Absolute Deviation | ||
| Percentile | ||
| Percentile Area | ||
| Quantile | ||
| Range | ||
| Skewness | ||
| Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix 25 | Auto Correlation | Resample Voxel Size |
| Cluster Prominence | ||
| Cluster Shade | ||
| Cluster Tendency | ||
| Contrast | ||
| Correlation | ||
| Difference Entropy | ||
| Dissimilarity | ||
| Energy | ||
| Entropy | ||
| Homogeneity | ||
| Homogeneity2 | ||
| InformationMeasureCorr1 | ||
| InformationMeasureCorr2 | ||
| Inverse Diff Moment Norm | ||
| Inverse Diff Norm | ||
| Inverse Variance | ||
| Max Probability | ||
| Sum Average | ||
| Sum Entropy | ||
| Sum Variance | ||
| Variance | ||
| Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix 3 | Auto Correlation | Resample Voxel Size |
| Cluster Prominence | ||
| Cluster Shade | ||
| Cluster Tendency | ||
| Contrast | ||
| Correlation | ||
| Difference Entropy | ||
| Dissimilarity | ||
| Energy | ||
| Entropy | ||
| Homogeneity | ||
| Homogeneity2 | ||
| InformationMeasureCorr1 | ||
| InformationMeasureCorr2 | ||
| Inverse Diff Moment Norm | ||
| Inverse Diff Norm | ||
| Inverse Variance | ||
| Max Probability | ||
| Sum Average | ||
| Sum Entropy | ||
| Sum Variance | ||
| Variance | ||
| Gray Level Run Length Matrix25 | Gray Level Nonuniformity | Resample Voxel Size, Butterworth Smooth |
| High Gray Level Run Emphasis | ||
| Long Run Emphasis | ||
| Long Run High Gray Level Emphasis | ||
| Long Run Low Gray Level Emphasis | ||
| Low Gray Level Run Emphasis | ||
| Run Length Nonuniformity | ||
| Run Percentage | ||
| Short Run Emphasis | ||
| Short Run High Gray Level Emphasis | ||
| Short Run Low Gray Level Emphasis | ||
| Intensity Direct | Energy | Resample Voxel Size |
| Energy Norm | ||
| Global Entropy | ||
| Global Max | ||
| Global Mean | ||
| Global Median | ||
| Global Min | ||
| Global Std | ||
| Global Uniformity | ||
| Inter Quartile Range | ||
| Kurtosis | ||
| Local Entropy Max | ||
| Local Entropy Mean | ||
| Local Entropy Median | ||
| Local Entropy Min | ||
| Local Entropy Std | ||
| Local Range Max | ||
| Local Range Mean | ||
| Local Range Median | ||
| Local Range Min | ||
| Local Range Std | ||
| Local Std Max | ||
| Local Std Mean | ||
| Local Std Median | ||
| Local Std Min | ||
| Local Std Std | ||
| Mean Absolute Deviation | ||
| Median Absolute Deviation | ||
| Percentile | ||
| Quantile | ||
| Range | ||
| Root Mean Square | ||
| Skewness | ||
| Intensity Histogram | Inter Quartile Range | Resample Voxel Size, Butterworth Smooth |
| Kurtosis | ||
| Mean Absolute Deviation | ||
| Median Absolute Deviation | ||
| Percentile | ||
| Percentile Area | ||
| Quantile | ||
| Range | ||
| Skewness | ||
| Neighbor Intensity Difference 25 | Busyness | Resample Voxel Size, Butterworth Smooth |
| Coarseness | ||
| Complexity | ||
| Contrast | ||
| Texture Strength | ||
| Neighbor Intensity Difference 3 | Busyness | Resample Voxel Size, Butterworth Smooth |
| Coarseness | ||
| Complexity | ||
| Contrast | ||
| Texture Strength | ||
| Shape | Compactness1 | – |
| Compactness2 | ||
| Convex | ||
| Convex Hull Volume | ||
| Convex Hull Volume 3D | ||
| Mass | ||
| Max3D Diameter | ||
| Mean Breadth | ||
| Number of Objects | ||
| Number of Voxel | ||
| Orientation | ||
| Roundness | ||
| Spherical Disproportion | ||
| Sphericity | ||
| Surface Area | ||
| Surface Area Density | ||
| Volume | ||
| Voxel Size | ||
| Intensity Histogram Gaussian Fit | Gaussian Amplitude | Resample Voxel Size |
| Gaussian Area | ||
| Gaussian Mean | ||
| Gaussian Std | ||
| Hist Area | ||
| Number of Gaussian |
Figure 3A hotspot map of the relationship between lymph node stage and the degree of fibrosis.
The performance of the predictive model using the XGBoost
| Modality | AUC | Accuracy | Degree | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | – | – | (I) Mild | 81.39 | 20.10 |
| 0.49 | 0.56 | (II) Moderate | 13.33 | 83.87 | |
| – | – | (III) Severe | 3.33 | 96.20 | |
| T2 | – | – | (I) Mild | 84.04 | 6.71 |
| 0.49 | 0.55 | (II) Moderate | 4.00 | 88.45 | |
| – | – | (III) Severe | 3.00 | 96.60 | |
| T1 + C | – | – | (I) Mild | 81.35 | 19.29 |
| 0.49 | 0.57 | (II) Moderate | 17.33 | 83.34 | |
| – | – | (III) Severe | 0.20 | 97.73 | |
| T1 + T2 + T1 + C | – | (I) Mild | 85.09 | 14.52 | |
| 0.49 | 0.58 | (II) Moderate | 13.33 | 88.93 | |
| – | – | (III) Severe | 3.00 | 96.58 | |
| CT | – | – | (I) Mild | 98.74 | 2.09 |
| 0.69 | 0.65 | (II) Moderate | 2.15 | 98.66 | |
| – | – | (III) Severe | 0.00 | 100.00 |
AUC, area under the curve; T1, T1-weighted scans; T1 + C, T1 post-contrast cans; T2, T2-weighted scans; CT, computed tomography.