Literature DB >> 35411235

An MRI radiomics nomogram improves the accuracy in identifying eligible candidates for fertility-preserving treatment in endometrioid adenocarcinoma.

Bi-Cong Yan1,2, Feng-Hua Ma3, Ying Li2, Yan-Feng Fan1, Zhi-Long Huang1, Xiao-Liang Ma2,3, Xue-Ting Wen2, Jin-Wei Qiang2.   

Abstract

It is difficult to identify eligible candidates for fertility-preserving treatment (FPT) among endometrioid adenocarcinoma (EAC) and atypical hyperplasia (AH) patients. Therefore, new approaches for improving the accuracy of candidate selection are warranted. From December 2014 to January 2020, 236 EAC/AH patients (age <50 and premenopausal) were retrospectively reviewed and randomly divided into the primary group (n=158) and validation group 1 (n=78). From February 2020 to December 2021, 51 EAC/AH patients were prospectively enrolled and formed the validation group 2. From the primary group, 385 features were extracted using pyradiomics from multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (including T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, apparent diffusion coefficient, and contrast enhancement sequences) and 13 radiomics features were selected using a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator. A clinical model based on clinical information (myometrial invasion on MRI and tumor grade in curettage) and a radiomics nomogram by integrating clinical information with the radiomics features was developed to identify eligible candidates of FPT. For identifying eligible candidates of FPT, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.73) in the primary group, and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.45-0.78) and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.53-0.86) in validation groups 1 and 2, respectively, for the clinical model; were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.80-0.93) in the primary group, and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71-0.93) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.87-1.0) in validation groups 1 and 2, respectively, for the radiomics nomogram. With the help of radiomics nomogram, the treatment decision determined from the clinical model was revised in 45 EAC/AH patients. The net reclassification index (NRI) was 0.80 and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) was 0.17, indicating that the nomogram could improve the accuracy in identifying eligible EAC/AH candidates for FPT. AJCR
Copyright © 2022.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Endometrioid carcinoma; fertility preservation; magnetic resonance imaging; nomogram; radiomics

Year:  2022        PMID: 35411235      PMCID: PMC8984890     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cancer Res        ISSN: 2156-6976            Impact factor:   6.166


  33 in total

1.  Predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging in assessing myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer: is radiological staging sufficient for planning conservative treatment?

Authors:  Thomas J Cade; Michael A Quinn; Orla M McNally; Deborah Neesham; Jan Pyman; Andrew Dobrotwir
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.437

2.  Physiological changes of the human uterine myometrium during menstrual cycle: preliminary evaluation using BOLD MR imaging.

Authors:  Aki Kido; Takashi Koyama; Masako Kataoka; Akira Yamamoto; Tsuneo Saga; Robert Turner; Kaori Togashi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  Myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer: diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted 3.0-T MR imaging--initial experience.

Authors:  Gigin Lin; Koon-Kwan Ng; Chee-Jen Chang; Jiun-Jie Wang; Kung-Chu Ho; Tzu-Chen Yen; Tzu-I Wu; Chun-Chieh Wang; Yu-Ruei Chen; Yu-Ting Huang; Shu-Hang Ng; Shih-Ming Jung; Ting-Chang Chang; Chyong-Huey Lai
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Accuracy of preoperative endometrial sampling diagnosis for predicting the final pathology grading in uterine endometrioid carcinoma.

Authors:  T P Batista; C L C Cavalcanti; A A G Tejo; A L R Bezerra
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 4.424

5.  Endometrial carcinoma: MR staging and causes of error.

Authors:  P V Foti; R Farina; M Coronella; C Ruggeri; S Palmucci; A Montana; P Milone; G Zarbo; R Caltabiano; S Lanzafame; G Politi; G C Ettorre
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 3.469

6.  Accuracy of preoperative endometrial sampling diagnosis of FIGO grade 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Mario M Leitao; Siobhan Kehoe; Richard R Barakat; Kaled Alektiar; Leda P Gattoc; Catherine Rabbitt; Dennis S Chi; Robert A Soslow; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-08-27       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 7.  Endometrial Cancer MRI staging: Updated Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology.

Authors:  Stephanie Nougaret; Mariana Horta; Evis Sala; Yulia Lakhman; Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara; Aki Kido; Gabriele Masselli; Nishat Bharwani; Elizabeth Sadowski; Andrea Ertmer; Milagros Otero-Garcia; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Teresa M Cunha; Andrea Rockall; Rosemarie Forstner
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Preoperative tumor texture analysis on MRI predicts high-risk disease and reduced survival in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Sigmund Ytre-Hauge; Julie A Dybvik; Arvid Lundervold; Øyvind O Salvesen; Camilla Krakstad; Kristine E Fasmer; Henrica M Werner; Balaji Ganeshan; Erling Høivik; Line Bjørge; Jone Trovik; Ingfrid S Haldorsen
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Characteristics of progestin-insensitive early stage endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia patients receiving second-line fertility-sparing treatment.

Authors:  Shuang Zhou; Zhiying Xu; Bingyi Yang; Jun Guan; Weiwei Shan; Yue Shi; Xiaojun Chen
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-07       Impact factor: 4.401

10.  Assessment of endometrial sampling as a predictor of final surgical pathology in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  L Helpman; R Kupets; A Covens; R S Saad; M A Khalifa; N Ismiil; Z Ghorab; V Dubé; S Nofech-Mozes
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-12-24       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.