| Literature DB >> 35445899 |
Cheng Chang1,2, Maomei Ruan1,2, Bei Lei1,2, Jian Feng3, Wenhui Xie4,5, Hong Yu6, Wenlu Zhao7, Yaqiong Ge8, Shaofeng Duan8, Wenjing Teng9, Qianfu Wu9, Xiaohua Qian10, Lihua Wang1, Hui Yan1, Ciyi Liu1, Liu Liu1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the value of 18F-FDG PET/CT molecular radiomics combined with a clinical model in predicting thoracic lymph node metastasis (LNM) in invasive lung adenocarcinoma (≤ 3 cm).Entities:
Keywords: CT; Lung adenocarcinoma; Lymph node metastasis; PET/CT; Radiomics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35445899 PMCID: PMC9023644 DOI: 10.1186/s13550-022-00895-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EJNMMI Res ISSN: 2191-219X Impact factor: 3.434
Clinical features of 528 patients enrolled in this study
| Clinical characteristics | Training ( | Testing ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lymph node (−) | Lymph node (+) | Lymph node (−) | Lymph node (+) | |||
| Age, year (median;IQR) | 62; 55 ~ 67 | 62; 55 ~ 68 | 0.62 | 63; 56 ~ 69 | 60; 50 ~ 70 | 0.166 |
| Male | 103 | 46 | 0.369 | 48 | 23 | 0.555 |
| Female | 163 | 59 | 65 | 21 | ||
| Yes | 84 | 36 | 0.617 | 38 | 15 | 0.958 |
| No | 182 | 69 | 75 | 29 | ||
| Upper lobe, right | 109 | 30 | 0.024 | 48 | 12 | 0.101 |
| Middle lobe, right | 46 | 18 | 21 | 10 | ||
| Lower lobe, right | 13 | 8 | 5 | 1 | ||
| Upper lobe, left | 60 | 29 | 26 | 15 | ||
| Lower lobe, left | 38 | 20 | 13 | 6 | ||
| CEA, ng/ml (median; IQR) | 2.32; 1.53 ~ 3.93 | 3.67; 2.11 ~ 8.50 | 0.273 | 2.21; 1.53 ~ 3.52 | 3.59; 2.01 ~ 6.27 | 0.251 |
| (+) | 260 | 103 | 0.836 | 112 | 44 | 0.279 |
| (−) | 6 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| (+) | 249 | 102 | 0.176 | 112 | 44 | 0.688 |
| (−) | 17 | 3 | 1 | 0 | ||
| (+) | 45 | 53 | < 0.001 | 15 | 18 | < 0.001 |
| (−) | 221 | 52 | 98 | 26 | ||
| Solid components, cm (median; IQR) | 0.85; 0.50 ~ 1.3 | 2.05; 1.65 ~ 2.45 | < 0.001 | 0.95; 0.55 ~ 1.4 | 2.1; 1.65 ~ 2.49 | < 0.001 |
| SUVmax (median;IQR) | 3.68; 2.1 ~ 7.45 | 11.11; 8.92 ~ 15.31 | 0.145 | 3.57; 2.08 ~ 6.99 | 10.25; 7.1 ~ 13.36 | 0.279 |
Fig. 1Workflow for developing a radiomics model based on PET/CT images to predict the thoracic LNM of lung adenocarcinoma. GLCM, gray level co-occurrence matrix; GLSZM, grey level size zone matrix; RLM, run length matrix; mRMR, maximum relevance minimum redundancy; LASSO, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator; ROC, receiver operating characteristic
Fig. 2ROC curve analysis of five predictive models, including the clinical model, CT radiomic model, PET radiomic model, PET/CT radiomic model, and combined PET/CT radiomics-clinical model in the training group (A) and test group (B), respectively
The performance of 5 different models for prediction of lymph metastasis of lung adenocarcinoma
| Models | AUC (95% CI) | ACC (95% CI) | SEN | SPE | PPV | NPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PET/CT | 0.92 (0.89–0.95) | 0.865 (0.826–0.898) | 0.865 | 0.867 | 0.943 | 0.717 |
| CT | 0.87 (0.83–0.90) | 0.741 (0.694–0.785) | 0.688 | 0.876 | 0.934 | 0.526 |
| PET | 0.83 (0.78–0.86) | 0.765 (0.719–0.808) | 0.759 | 0.781 | 0.898 | 0.562 |
| Clinical | 0.93 (0.90–0.95) | 0.838 (0.797–0.974) | 0.664 | 0.94 | 0.867 | 0.827 |
| PET/CT + Clinical | 0.95 (0.93–0.97) | 0.879 (0.841–0.91) | 0.717 | 0.974 | 0.943 | 0.853 |
| PET/CT | 0.91 (0.86–0.95) | 0.873 (0.81–0.92) | 0.885 | 0.841 | 0.935 | 0.74 |
| CT | 0.87 (0.80–0.92) | 0.771 (0.697–0.834) | 0.717 | 0.909 | 0.953 | 0.556 |
| PET | 0.80 (0.73–0.86) | 0.79 (0.718–0.851) | 0.832 | 0.682 | 0.87 | 0.612 |
| Clinical | 0.91 (0.85–0.95) | 0.783 (0.711–0.845) | 0.578 | 0.925 | 0.841 | 0.761 |
| PET/CT + Clinical | 0.94 (0.89–0.97) | 0.847 (0.781–0.89) | 0.656 | 0.978 | 0.955 | 0.805 |
AUC: area under the curve; CI: confidence interval; ACC: accuracy; SEN: sensitivity; SPE: specificity; PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value. The PET/CT, CT, and PET models represent PET/CT, CT, and PET radiomics models, respectively
DeLong test of ROC curves between different models
| Comparisons | Training | Testing | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Z score | Z score | |||
| PET/CT vs. PET model | 5.157 | < 0.001 | 3.653 | < 0.001 |
| PET/CT vs. CT model | 3.514 | < 0.001 | 1.931 | 0.054 |
| PET vs. CT model | 1.299 | 0.194 | 1.35 | 0.177 |
| Integrated vs. PET/CT model | 3.943 | < 0.001 | 1.65 | 0.099 |
| Integrated vs. Clinical model | 3.257 | < 0.001 | 2.011 | 0.044 |
| PET/CT vs. Clinical model | 0.484 | 0.628 | 0.268 | 0.788 |
The PET/CT, PET, and CT models represent PET/CT, PET, and CT radiomics models,respectively; integrated model represent PET/CT radiomics-clinical model
Univariate logistic analysis of clinical features and lymph node metastasis
| Variables | OR | |
|---|---|---|
| Pleural traction | 5.01 (3.05–8.29) | < 0.001 |
| Solid composition | 37.99 (18.69–87.63) | < 0.001 |
| Locations | 1.18 (1.02–1.36) | 0.027 |
Multivariate logistic analysis of clinical and radiomic features and lymph node metastasis
| Variables | OR | |
|---|---|---|
| Solid composition | 13.32 (5.92–33.61) | < 0.001 |
| Locations | 1.28 (1.01–1.63) | 0.044 |
| Radscore | 2.04 (1.55–2.78) | < 0.001 |
| Intercept | 0.01 (0–0.04) | < 0.001 |
Fig. 3Evaluation of the performance of the integrated PET/CT molecular radiomics-clinical model. A The nomogram was developed by combining the PET/CT radiomic score and the clinical features of solid composition and location/body part (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 represent the upper lobe, middle lobe, and lower lobe of the right lung and the upper lobe and lower lobe of the left lung, respectively). B Calibration curve with the Hosmer–Lemeshow test of the nomogram in the training cohort (left panel) and test cohort (right panel). The calibration curve shows the calibration of the model in terms of the consistency between the predicted risk of thoracic LNM and the real observed thoracic LNM status. The x-axis represents the predicted risk of thoracic LNM, and the y-axis represents the real thoracic LNM status. C Decision curve analysis of the nomograms. The y-axis measures the standardized net benefit. The dark line represents the PET/CT molecular radiomics-clinical nomogram model, the red line represents the clinical features nomogram, the grey line represents the assumption that all patients are negative for thoracic LNM, and the blue line represents the assumption that all patients are positive for thoracic LNM