| Literature DB >> 35331162 |
Zedong Dai1, Ran Wei1, Hao Wang1, Wenjuan Hu1, Xilin Sun1, Jie Zhu1, Hong Li1, Yaqiong Ge2, Bin Song3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the ability of a multimodality MRI-based radiomics model in predicting the aggressiveness of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC).Entities:
Keywords: Aggressiveness; Multimodality MRI; Papillary thyroid carcinoma; Radiomics; Sparse representation
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35331162 PMCID: PMC8952254 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-022-00779-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Imaging ISSN: 1471-2342 Impact factor: 1.930
Fig. 1Segmentation results of CE-T1WI, T2WI and DWI modalities, the red area in the second line represents the segmentation result
Patient features in the aggressiveness and non-aggressiveness groups
| Aggressiveness (n = 51) | Non-aggressiveness (n = 56) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age(years) | 42.37 ± 14.27 | 46.68 ± 13.86 | 0.979 |
| Female | 35 | 45 | 0.006 |
| Male | 16 | 11 | |
| Diameter(mm) | 13.08 ± 6.44 | 9.36 ± 3.86 | 0.001 |
| 1 | 28 | 32 | 0.443 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | |
| 3 | 22 | 22 | |
| Yes | 31 | 0 | 0 |
| No | 20 | 56 | |
| Multi-lesions | |||
| Yes | 12 | 11 | 0.938 |
| No | 39 | 45 |
The p-values was calculated by independent sample t-test
Fig. 2Confusion matrix of the clustering results. (Agg is the abbreviation of aggressiveness)
The results of cross-validation set data
| Models | AUC | ACC | SEN | SPE | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE-T1WI | 0.856 [0.753,0.928] | 0.803 [0.711,0.891] | 0.794 [0.648,0.920] | 0.811 [0.621,0.913] | 0.794 [0.648,0.920] | 0.811 [0.618,0.914] |
| T2WI | 0.855 [0.752,0.928] | 0.817 [0.727,0.909] | 0.794 [0.621,0.913] | 0.838 [0.680,0.938] | 0.818 [0.642,0.932] | 0.816 [0.657,0.923] |
| DWI | 0.927 [0.840,0.975] | 0.887 [0.813,0.961] | 0.853 [0.689,0.950] | 0.919 [0.781,0.983] | 0.906 [0.746,0.981] | 0.872 [0.726,0.957] |
| Combined | 0.961 [0.886,0.993] | 0.930 [0.871,0.989] | 0.912 [0.763,0.981] | 0.946 [0.818,0.993] | 0.940 [0.795,0.993] | 0.921 [0.786,0.983] |
95% confidence intervals are included in brackets. AUC, ACC, SEN, SPE, PPV, NPV are abbreviations of area under curve, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, negative predictive value and positive predictive value, respectively
The results of independent test set data
| Models | AUC | ACC | SEN | SPE | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CE-T1WI | 0.789 [0.622, 0.907] | 0.778 [0.642,0.914] | 0.824 [0.566,0.962] | 0.737 [0.488,0.909] | 0.737 [0.480,0.912] | 0.824 [0.566,0.962] |
| T2WI | 0.830 [0.668,0.934] | 0.778 [0.642,0.914] | 0.647 [0.383,0.858] | 0.895 [0.669,0.987] | 0.846 [0.546,0.981] | 0.739 [0.516,0.898] |
| DWI | 0.944 [0.813,0.993] | 0.861 [0.748,0.974] | 0.824 [0.566,0.962] | 0.895 [0.669,0.987] | 0.875 [0.605,0.986] | 0.850 [0.621,0.968] |
| Combined | 0.960 [0.836,0.997] | 0.917 [0.827,1.000] | 0.882 [0.636,0.985] | 0.947 [0.740,0.999] | 0.937 [0.686,0.999] | 0.900 [0.683,0.988] |
95% confidence intervals are included in brackets. AUC, ACC, SEN, SPE, PPV, NPV are abbreviations of area under curve, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, negative predictive value and positive predictive value, respectively
Fig. 3ROCs for the CE-T1WI, T2WI, DWI and combined model in predicting aggressive and non-aggressive tumors in the cross-validation and test cohort
Fig. 4Variation of model accuracy with the number of features
Fig. 5The top 5 features of importance in the classification task, CE-T1WI, T2WI and DWI, respectively
The summary of 528 features
| Feature category | Feature name | Feature number | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | |||||||||
| Compactness | Compactness-square | Max-length | |||||||
| Spherical disproportion | Sphericity | Superficial-area | |||||||
| Surface to volume ratio | Volume | Region to bounding-box ratio | |||||||
| Max major-length | Min minor-length | Eccentricity | |||||||
| Orientation | Solidity | Fourier-descriptors | |||||||
| 18 | |||||||||
| Energy | h-energy | Kurtosis | Max | ||||||
| Mean absolute deviation | Mean | Media | Min | ||||||
| Range | Root mean square | Skewness | Standard-deviation | ||||||
| h-uniformity | variance | h-mean | h-variance | ||||||
| h-skewness | h-kurtosis | ||||||||
| 39 | |||||||||
| GLCM | Energy | Contrast | Correlation | Homogeneity | |||||
| Variance | sun average | Entropy | Dissimilarity | ||||||
| Short run emphasis | Long run emphasis | ||||||||
| GLRLM | Gray-level nonuniformity | Run-length nonuniformity | |||||||
| Run percentage | Low gray-level run emphasis | ||||||||
| High gray-level run emphasis | Short run low gray-level emphasis | ||||||||
| Short run high gray-level emphasis | Long run low gray-level emphasis | ||||||||
| Long run high gray-level emphasis | Gray-level variance | ||||||||
| Run-length variance | Small zone emphasis | ||||||||
| Large zone emphasis | |||||||||
| GLSZM | Gray-level nonuniformity | Zone-size nonuniformity | |||||||
| zone percentage | Low gray-level zone emphasis | ||||||||
| High gray-level zone emphasis | Small zone low gray-level emphasis | ||||||||
| Small zone high gray-level emphasis | Large zone low gray-level emphasis | ||||||||
| Large zone high gray-level emphasis | Gray-level variance | ||||||||
| Zone-size variance | |||||||||
| NGTDM | Coarseness | Contrast | Busyness | Complexity | Strength | ||||
| 456 | |||||||||
| LLL | HLL | LHL | HHL | LLH | HLH | LHH | HHH | ||