Jaileene Pérez-Morales1, Hong Lu2, Wei Mu2, Ilke Tunali2,3, Tugce Kutuk4, Steven A Eschrich5, Yoganand Balagurunathan5, Robert J Gillies2, Matthew B Schabath1,6. 1. Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 2. Department of Cancer Physiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 3. Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 5. Department of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 6. Department of Thoracic Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Image-based biomarkers could have translational implications by characterizing tumor behavior of lung cancers diagnosed during lung cancer screening. In this study, peritumoral and intratumoral radiomics and volume doubling time (VDT) were used to identify high-risk subsets of lung patients diagnosed in lung cancer screening that are associated with poor survival outcomes. METHODS: Data and images were acquired from the National Lung Screening Trial. VDT was calculated between two consequent screening intervals approximately 1 year apart; peritumoral and intratumoral radiomics were extracted from the baseline screen. Overall survival (OS) was the main endpoint. Classification and Regression Tree analyses identified the most predictive covariates to classify patient outcomes. RESULTS: Decision tree analysis stratified patients into three risk-groups (low, intermediate, and high) based on VDT and one radiomic feature (compactness). High-risk patients had extremely poor survival outcomes (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.15; 25% 5-year OS) versus low-risk patients (HR = 1.00; 83.3% 5-year OS). Among early-stage lung cancers, high-risk patients had poor survival outcomes (HR = 9.07; 44.4% 5-year OS) versus the low-risk group (HR = 1.00; 90.9% 5-year OS). For VDT, the decision tree analysis identified a novel cut-point of 279 days and using this cut-point VDT alone discriminated between aggressive (HR = 4.18; 45% 5-year OS) versus indolent/low-risk cancers (HR = 1.00; 82.8% 5-year OS). CONCLUSION: We utilized peritumoral and intratumoral radiomic features and VDT to generate a model that identify a high-risk group of screen-detected lung cancers associated with poor survival outcomes. These vulnerable subset of screen-detected lung cancers may be candidates for more aggressive surveillance/follow-up and treatment, such as adjuvant therapy.
BACKGROUND: Image-based biomarkers could have translational implications by characterizing tumor behavior of lung cancers diagnosed during lung cancer screening. In this study, peritumoral and intratumoral radiomics and volume doubling time (VDT) were used to identify high-risk subsets of lung patients diagnosed in lung cancer screening that are associated with poor survival outcomes. METHODS: Data and images were acquired from the National Lung Screening Trial. VDT was calculated between two consequent screening intervals approximately 1 year apart; peritumoral and intratumoral radiomics were extracted from the baseline screen. Overall survival (OS) was the main endpoint. Classification and Regression Tree analyses identified the most predictive covariates to classify patient outcomes. RESULTS: Decision tree analysis stratified patients into three risk-groups (low, intermediate, and high) based on VDT and one radiomic feature (compactness). High-risk patients had extremely poor survival outcomes (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.15; 25% 5-year OS) versus low-risk patients (HR = 1.00; 83.3% 5-year OS). Among early-stage lung cancers, high-risk patients had poor survival outcomes (HR = 9.07; 44.4% 5-year OS) versus the low-risk group (HR = 1.00; 90.9% 5-year OS). For VDT, the decision tree analysis identified a novel cut-point of 279 days and using this cut-point VDT alone discriminated between aggressive (HR = 4.18; 45% 5-year OS) versus indolent/low-risk cancers (HR = 1.00; 82.8% 5-year OS). CONCLUSION: We utilized peritumoral and intratumoral radiomic features and VDT to generate a model that identify a high-risk group of screen-detected lung cancers associated with poor survival outcomes. These vulnerable subset of screen-detected lung cancers may be candidates for more aggressive surveillance/follow-up and treatment, such as adjuvant therapy.
Entities:
Keywords:
CART; LDCT; NLST; Radiomics; VDT; early detection
Authors: Rebecca M Lindell; Thomas E Hartman; Stephen J Swensen; James R Jett; David E Midthun; Henry D Tazelaar; Jayawant N Mandrekar Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Philippe Lambin; Emmanuel Rios-Velazquez; Ralph Leijenaar; Sara Carvalho; Ruud G P M van Stiphout; Patrick Granton; Catharina M L Zegers; Robert Gillies; Ronald Boellard; André Dekker; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2012-01-16 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Brigitte Dreno; John F Thompson; Bernard Mark Smithers; Mario Santinami; Thomas Jouary; Ralf Gutzmer; Evgeny Levchenko; Piotr Rutkowski; Jean-Jacques Grob; Sergii Korovin; Kamil Drucis; Florent Grange; Laurent Machet; Peter Hersey; Ivana Krajsova; Alessandro Testori; Robert Conry; Bernard Guillot; Wim H J Kruit; Lev Demidov; John A Thompson; Igor Bondarenko; Jaroslaw Jaroszek; Susana Puig; Gabriela Cinat; Axel Hauschild; Jelle J Goeman; Hans C van Houwelingen; Fernando Ulloa-Montoya; Andrea Callegaro; Benjamin Dizier; Bart Spiessens; Muriel Debois; Vincent G Brichard; Jamila Louahed; Patrick Therasse; Channa Debruyne; John M Kirkwood Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2018-06-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Giulia Veronesi; Patrick Maisonneuve; Massimo Bellomi; Cristiano Rampinelli; Iara Durli; Raffaella Bertolotti; Lorenzo Spaggiari Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-12-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sudhir Srivastava; Eugene J Koay; Alexander D Borowsky; Angelo M De Marzo; Sharmistha Ghosh; Paul D Wagner; Barnett S Kramer Journal: Nat Rev Cancer Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 60.716
Authors: Matthew B Schabath; Pierre P Massion; Zachary J Thompson; Steven A Eschrich; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Dmitry Goldof; Denise R Aberle; Robert J Gillies Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-10 Impact factor: 3.240