| Literature DB >> 35800046 |
Liping Yang1, Panpan Xu1, Mengyue Li2, Menglu Wang1, Mengye Peng1, Ying Zhang1, Tingting Wu1, Wenjie Chu1, Kezheng Wang1, Hongxue Meng3, Lingbo Zhang4.
Abstract
Backgrounds: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation profiles play a vital role in treatment strategy decisions for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the predictive efficacy of baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT-based radiomics analysis for EGFR mutation status, mutation site, and the survival benefit of targeted therapy.Entities:
Keywords: EGFR mutation; PET-CT; nomogram; non-small cell lung cancer; radiomics; survival prognosis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35800046 PMCID: PMC9253544 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.894323
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Study design and patient allocation.
Figure 2The workflow of our study. (A) image acquisition; (B) tumor masking; (C) feature extraction; (D) feature selection; (E) model construction; (F) nomogram generation.
Demographic information and clinicopathological characteristics of selected patients with NSCLC.
| Variable | EGFR-WT (n=132) | EGFR-21-MT (n=102) | EGFR-19-MT (n=79) | X²/Z |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Female | 40 (30.3) | 75 (73.53) | 49 (62.03) | 47.0319 | <0.001 |
| Male | 92 (69.7) | 27 (26.47) | 30 (37.97) | ||
|
| |||||
| median | 63.92 ± 8.71 | 62.62 ± 8.41 | 61.8 ± 9.9 | 1.5015 | 0.2244 |
|
| |||||
| I | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 8.7563 | 0.0675 |
| II | 4 (3.03) | 10 (9.8) | 11 (13.92) | ||
| III | 11 (13.92) | 31 (30.39) | 23 (29.11) | ||
| IV | 87 (65.91) | 61 (59.8) | 45 (56.96) | ||
|
| |||||
| Upper lobe | 38 (28.79) | 32 (31.37) | 31 (39.24) | 3.8972 | 0.4201 |
| Middle lobe | 43 (32.58) | 34 (33.33) | 18 (22.78) | ||
| Lower lobe | 51 (38.64) | 36 (35.29) | 30 (37.97) | ||
|
| |||||
| Lepidic | 12 (9.09) | 14 (13.73) | 24 (30.38) | 4.2470 | 0.0557 |
| Acinar | 45 (34.09) | 35 (34.31) | 45 (56.96) | ||
| Papillary | 44 (33.33) | 42 (41.18) | 5 (6.33) | ||
| Micropapillary | 0 (0) | 4 (3.92) | 1 (1.27) | ||
| Solid | 31 (23.48) | 7 (6.86) | 4 (5.06) | ||
|
| |||||
| Normal (< 5 | 84 (63.64) | 60 (58.82) | 43 (54.43) | 1.7949 | 0.4076 |
| Abnormal (≥ | 48 (36.36) | 42 (41.18) | 36 (45.57) | ||
|
| |||||
| Current or ever | 49 (37.12) | 34 (33.33) | 22 (27.85) | 1.9094 | 0.3849 |
| Never | 83 (62.88) | 68 (66.67) | 57 (72.15) | ||
|
| |||||
| median | 3 (2.4-3.2) | 3 (2.1-3.2) | 3.1 (2.66-3.45) | 5.1873 | 0.0747 |
|
| |||||
| median | 16.91 (13.43-20.03) | 24.75 (20.41-27.51) | 28.62 (23.81-40.9) | 113.5355 | <0.001 |
|
| |||||
| median | 5.56 (4.46-8.4) | 5.44 (4.42-7.04) | 5.08 (4.12-6.69) | 5.2287 | 0.0732 |
|
| |||||
| median | 284.43 (95.18-790.95) | 344.67 (94.02-688.56) | 270.98 (104.55-697.4) | 0.1295 | 0.9373 |
SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value; SUV, mean mean standardized uptake value; TLG, total lesion glycolysis; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen.
The predictive performance (area under the curve) of three classifiers in Training set and Validation set.
| Classifier | Training set | Validation set | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EGFR-WT | EGFR-21-MT | EGFR-19-MT | EGFR-WT | EGFR-21-MT | EGFR-19-MT | |
|
| 0.881 | 0.851 | 0.849 | 0.926 | 0.805 | 0.859 |
|
| 0.855 | 0.780 | 0.879 | 0.887 | 0.776 | 0.822 |
|
| 0.829 | 0.826 | 0.783 | 0.811 | 0.713 | 0.728 |
Figure 3The predictive performance of models. The ROC of SVM model in training set (A) and validation set (B). The ROC of DT model in training set (C) and validation set (D). The ROC of RF model in training set (E) and validation set (F).
Radiomic characteristics and significance of PET/CT radiomic scores (Rad-scores) used to calculate OS.
| Feature name | Coefficient |
|---|---|
| original_glrlm_LowGrayLevelRunEmphasis.CT | 7.7718 |
| original_glszm_LowGrayLevelZoneEmphasis.CT | 4.5851 |
| wavelet.HHL_glcm_Correlation.CT | 2.8216 |
| wavelet.HLH_glszm_ZonePercentage.CT | 0.2093 |
| wavelet.LHH_gldm_SmallDependenceEmphasis.CT | -0.6163 |
| original_shape_LeastAxisLength.PET | 0.0040 |
| wavelet.LHH_glcm_Idmn.PET | 0.9181 |
| wavelet.LLH firstorder Kurtosis.PET | 0.0933 |
Radiomic characteristics and significance of PET/CT radiomic scores (Rad-scores) used to calculate PFS.
| Feature name | Coefficient |
|---|---|
| original_glrlm_ShortRunLowGrayLevelEmphasis.CT | 9.9513 |
| original_glszm_LowGrayLevelZoneEmphasis.CT | 3.2857 |
| original_shape_Flatness.CT | -0.4751 |
| wavelet.HHL_glcm_Correlation.CT | 1.4670 |
| wavelet.LLH_glcm_Correlation.CT | 1.3844 |
| original_shape_LeastAxisLength.PET | 0.0117 |
| wavelet.HLL_glcm_Idn.PET | 0. 1843 |
| wavelet.LHH_glcm_Idmn.PET | 0. 1424 |
| wavelet.LLH firstorder Kurtosis.PET | 0. 1105 |
Figure 4The Integrated model for OS (A) and PFS (B) prediction based on rad-score and clinical factors (mutation site, SUVmax). The Radiomics model for OS (C) and PFS (D) prediction based on rad-score. The Clinical model for OS (E) and PFS (F) prediction based on clinical factors (mutation site, SUVmax).
Prognostic nomogram performance.
| Model | OS | PFS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training set | Validation set | Training set | Validation set | |||||
| c-index | 95% CI | c-index | 95% CI | c-index | 95% CI | c-index | 95% CI | |
|
| 0.80 | 0.75-0.84 | 0.83 | 0.78-0.87 | 0.80 | 0.75-0.85 | 0.82 | 0.78-0.87 |
|
| 0.80 | 0.75-0.84 | 0.82 | 0.77-0.86 | 0.79 | 0.74-0.84 | 0.82 | 0.77-0.86 |
|
| 0.65 | 0.60-0.71 | 0.62 | 0.59-0.71 | 0.67 | 0.62-0.73 | 0.67 | 0.61-0.73 |
Figure 5Calibration curve of the integrated model (A), radiomics model (B) and clinical model (C) for OS estimation in the training set. Calibration curve of the integrated model (D), radiomics model (E) and clinical model (F) for OS estimation in the validation set. Calibration curve of the integrated model (G), radiomics model (H) and clinical model (I) for PFS estimation in the training set. Calibration curve of the integrated model (J), radiomics model (K) and clinical model (L) for PFS estimation in the validation set.
Figure 6Decision curve of the nomograms for OS (A) and PFS (B) in the training set. Decision curve of the nomograms for OS (C) and PFS (D) in the validation set.