Lucy Pu1,2, Syed F Ashraf1, Naciye S Gezer3, Iclal Ocak3, Daniel E Dresser4, Joseph K Leader3, Rajeev Dhupar1,5. 1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. North Allegheny Senior High School, Wexford, Pennsylvania, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 4. Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 5. Surgical Services Division, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimating whole-body composition from limited region-computed tomography (CT) scans has many potential applications in clinical medicine; however, it is challenging. PURPOSE: To investigate if whole-body composition based on several tissue types (visceral adipose tissue [VAT], subcutaneous adipose tissue [SAT], intermuscular adipose tissue [IMAT], skeletal muscle [SM], and bone) can be reliably estimated from a chest CT scan only. METHODS: A cohort of 97 lung cancer subjects who underwent both chest CT scans and whole-body positron emission tomography-CT scans at our institution were collected. We used our in-house software to automatically segment and quantify VAT, SAT, IMAT, SM, and bone on the CT images. The field-of-views of the chest CT scans and the whole-body CT scans were standardized, namely, from vertebra T1 to L1 and from C1 to the bottom of the pelvis, respectively. Multivariate linear regression was used to develop the computer models for estimating the volumes of whole-body tissues from chest CT scans. Subject demographics (e.g., gender and age) and lung volume were included in the modeling analysis. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to validate the performance of the prediction models. Mean absolute difference (MAD) and R-squared (R2 ) were used as the performance metrics to assess the model performance. RESULTS: The R2 values when estimating volumes of whole-body SAT, VAT, IMAT, total fat, SM, and bone from the regular chest CT scans were 0.901, 0.929, 0.900, 0.933, 0.928, and 0.918, respectively. The corresponding MADs (percentage difference) were 1.44 ± 1.21 L (12.21% ± 11.70%), 0.63 ± 0.49 L (29.68% ± 61.99%), 0.12 ± 0.09 L (16.20% ± 18.42%), 1.65 ± 1.40 L (10.43% ± 10.79%), 0.71 ± 0.68 L (5.14% ± 4.75%), and 0.17 ± 0.15 L (4.32% ± 3.38%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our algorithm shows promise in its ability to estimate whole-body compositions from chest CT scans. Body composition measures based on chest CT scans are more accurate than those based on vertebra third lumbar.
BACKGROUND: Estimating whole-body composition from limited region-computed tomography (CT) scans has many potential applications in clinical medicine; however, it is challenging. PURPOSE: To investigate if whole-body composition based on several tissue types (visceral adipose tissue [VAT], subcutaneous adipose tissue [SAT], intermuscular adipose tissue [IMAT], skeletal muscle [SM], and bone) can be reliably estimated from a chest CT scan only. METHODS: A cohort of 97 lung cancer subjects who underwent both chest CT scans and whole-body positron emission tomography-CT scans at our institution were collected. We used our in-house software to automatically segment and quantify VAT, SAT, IMAT, SM, and bone on the CT images. The field-of-views of the chest CT scans and the whole-body CT scans were standardized, namely, from vertebra T1 to L1 and from C1 to the bottom of the pelvis, respectively. Multivariate linear regression was used to develop the computer models for estimating the volumes of whole-body tissues from chest CT scans. Subject demographics (e.g., gender and age) and lung volume were included in the modeling analysis. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to validate the performance of the prediction models. Mean absolute difference (MAD) and R-squared (R2 ) were used as the performance metrics to assess the model performance. RESULTS: The R2 values when estimating volumes of whole-body SAT, VAT, IMAT, total fat, SM, and bone from the regular chest CT scans were 0.901, 0.929, 0.900, 0.933, 0.928, and 0.918, respectively. The corresponding MADs (percentage difference) were 1.44 ± 1.21 L (12.21% ± 11.70%), 0.63 ± 0.49 L (29.68% ± 61.99%), 0.12 ± 0.09 L (16.20% ± 18.42%), 1.65 ± 1.40 L (10.43% ± 10.79%), 0.71 ± 0.68 L (5.14% ± 4.75%), and 0.17 ± 0.15 L (4.32% ± 3.38%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our algorithm shows promise in its ability to estimate whole-body compositions from chest CT scans. Body composition measures based on chest CT scans are more accurate than those based on vertebra third lumbar.