| Literature DB >> 35280863 |
Ningxin Chen1, Ruikun Li2, Mengmeng Jiang3, Yixian Guo3, Jiejun Chen3, Dazhen Sun2, Lisheng Wang2, Xiuzhong Yao3.
Abstract
Purposes andEntities:
Keywords: contrast-enhanced CT; mediastinal window; progression-free survival (PFS); radiomics analysis; small cell lung cancer (SCLC)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35280863 PMCID: PMC8911879 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.833283
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
Figure 1The workflow of radiomics analysis. (A) The tumor region of interests (ROIs), which were manually segmented by an experienced radiologist from CT images with the lung window and contrast-enhanced mediastinal window, respectively; (B) the high throughput image features were extracted automatically from each ROI and the radiomic signatures were selected from them; (C) Random survival forests (RSFs) models were established for the progression-free survival (PFS) prediction.
Clinical characteristics.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 130 | 56 | |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 109 (83.8%) | 50 (89.3%) | 0.334 |
| Female | 21 (16.2%) | 6 (10.7%) | |
| Age | 62 (37–80) | 62 (43–78) | 0.635 |
| Stage | |||
| Limited stage | 47 (36.2%) | 19 (33.9%) | 0.771 |
| Extensive stage | 83 (63.8%) | 37 (66.1%) |
Description of the selected radiomic features.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| F1 | Lung_log-sigma-1-0-mm-3D_glcm_Correlation | A Measure of the linear dependency of gray level values to their respective voxels in the GLCM |
| F2 | Lung_log-sigma-3-0-mm-3D_glcm_ClusterShade | A measure of the skewness and uniformity of the GLCM |
| F3 | Lung_original_firstorder_90Percentile | The 90th percentile of the voxels included in the ROI |
| F4 | Lung_wavelet-LHH_glcm_ClusterShade | A measure of the skewness and uniformity of the GLCM |
| F5 | Lung_log-sigma-4-0-mm-3D_glszm_SmallAreaLowGrayLevelEmphasis | A measure of the proportion of the joint distribution of smaller size zones with lower gray-level values |
| F6 | Lung_original_shape_Flatness | A measure of the relationship between the largest and smallest principal components in the ROI shape |
| F7 | Mediastinal_log-sigma-4-0-mm-3D_glszm_SmallAreaLowGrayLevelEmphasis | A measure of the proportion of the joint distribution of smaller size zones with lower gray-level values |
| F8 | Mediastinal_wavelet-HHL_firstorder_Skewness | A measure of the asymmetry of the distribution of values about the Mean value |
| F9 | Mediastinal_original_shape_Flatness | A measure of the relationship between the largest and smallest principal components in the ROI shape |
| F10 | Mediastinal_log-sigma-5-0-mm-3D_glszm_GrayLevelNonUniformityNormalized | A measure of the variability of gray-level intensity values in the image |
| F11 | Mediastinal_wavelet-HLH_firstorder_Skewness | A measure of the asymmetry of the distribution of values about the Mean value |
| F12 | Mediastinal_log-sigma-3-0-mm-3D_glcm_InverseVariance | A measure of inverse variance |
Figure 2The selected lung window features. (A) The RSF-based feature importance score; (B) the correlation heatmap.
Figure 3The selected mediastinal window features. (A) The RSF-based feature importance score; (B) the correlation heatmap.
Figure 4Kaplan–Meier progression-free survival curves of prognostic models based on 3 clinical features (Model_C3), 6 lung window features (Model_L6), and mediastinal window features (Model_M6) for patients in (A) the training set and (B) the independent test set. In the training set, the median PFS were 211, 233, and 238 days for the low-risk group and 140, 99, and 112 days for the high-risk group. In the independent test set, the median PFS were 209, 209, and 209 days for the low-risk group and 147, 91 and 90 days for the high-risk group.
Prognostic performance of different survival prediction models.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| Basic models | ||||
| Model_C3 | 0.6426 | 0.6026 | 0.5218 | 0.6312 |
| Model_L6 | 0.7455 | 0.6951 | 0.7727 | 0.7836 |
| Model_M6 | 0.7728 | 0.7192 | 0.8646 | 0.7964 |
| Combined models based on radiomic features | ||||
| Model_L6+M6 | 0.7927 | 0.7362 | 0.8769 | 0.8387 |
|
| 0.8033 |
|
|
|
| Combined models based on radiomic and clinical features | ||||
| Model_L6+C3 | 0.7500 | 0.7316 | 0.7898 | 0.8206 |
| Model_M6+C3 | 0.7933 | 0.7440 | 0.8485 | 0.8367 |
| Model_L6+M6+C3 | 0.7961 | 0.7459 | 0.8523 | 0.8413 |
| Model_L5+M6+C3 |
| 0.7518 | 0.8258 | 0.8441 |
The bold values indicate the highest score in each performance metric. C3 means 3 clinical features, L6 means 6 selected lung window radiomic features, M6 means 6 selected mediastinal window radiomic features, L5 means the remained 5 lung window radiomic feature by removing the most correlated feature (f6) among the 12 radiomic features according to Pearson's correlation on the basis of L6.
Figure 5Progression-free probability curves of the survival function generated by our model for three typical cases. (A) A patient with PFS less than 90 days (85 days); (B) a patient with PFS more than 90 days (156 days); and (C) a patient with PFS more than 1 year (431 days).
Figure 6Two typical cases from the visual analysis and our method: (A) a patient (male, age = 62 years, limited stage) with PFS of 90 days. Our model correctly predicted it with a high risk of 157.0, but the visual and clinical prognosis was good. (B) A patient (male, age = 67 years, extensive stage) with PFS of 431 days. Our model correctly predicted it with a low risk of 55.0, but the visual and clinical prognosis was poor. From left to right are the lung window CT, enhanced mediastinal window CT, and the feature weights, respectively.