| Literature DB >> 35875154 |
Cuiyun Wu1, Junfa Chen1, Yuqian Fan2, Ming Zhao3, Xiaodong He1, Yuguo Wei4, Weidong Ge5, Yang Liu5.
Abstract
Objectives: The study developed and validated a radiomics nomogram based on a combination of computed tomography (CT) radiomics signature and clinical factors and explored the ability of radiomics for individualized prediction of Ki-67 expression in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Entities:
Keywords: Ki-67; computed tomography; hepatocellular carcinoma; models; nomograms; radiomics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35875154 PMCID: PMC9299359 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.943942
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Flowchart for the construction and evaluation of radiomics nomogram.
Characteristics of HCC patients in the high and low Ki-67 expression groups.
| Variables | Training group (n = 120) | Validation group (n = 52) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High expression (n = 63) | Low expression (n = 57) |
| High expression (n = 27) | Low expression (n = 25) |
| |
| Age (years) | 57.4 ± 11.61 | 58.84 ± 10.59 | 0.479 | 60.93 ± 11.69 | 61.32 ± 11.26 | 0.902 |
| Sex | 0.855 | 0.193 | ||||
| Female | 6 (9.5%) | 6 (10.5%) | 5 (18.5%) | 1 (4%) | ||
| Male | 57 (90.5%) | 51 (89.5%) | 22 (81.5%) | 24 (96%) | ||
| HBs-Ag | 0.613 | 0.853 | ||||
| Negative | 12 (19%) | 13 (22.8%) | 8 (29.6%) | 8 (32%) | ||
| Positive | 51 (81%) | 44 (77.2%) | 19 (70.4%) | 17 (68%) | ||
| AFP (µg/L) | 0.001* | 0.053 | ||||
| ≤20 | 19 (30.2%) | 34 (59.6%) | 7 (25.9%) | 13 (52%) | ||
| >20 | 44 (69.8%) | 23 (40.4%) | 20 (74.1%) | 12 (48%) | ||
| Edmondson grade | 0.002* | 0.002* | ||||
| I–II | 38 (60.3%) | 49 (86%) | 13 (48.1%) | 22 (88%) | ||
| III–IV | 25 (39.7%) | 8 (14%) | 14 (51.9%) | 3 (12%) | ||
| Tumor size | 0.665 | 0.054 | ||||
| ≤5 cm | 40 (63.5%) | 34 (59.6%) | 9 (33.3%) | 15 (60%) | ||
| >5 cm | 23 (36.5%) | 23 (40.4%) | 18 (66.7%) | 10 (40%) | ||
| Cirrhosis | 0.13 | 0.392 | ||||
| Absent | 37 (58.7%) | 41 (71.9%) | 13 (48.1%) | 15 (60%) | ||
| present | 26 (41.3%) | 16 (28.1%) | 14 (51.9%) | 10 (40%) | ||
| Tumor capsule | 0.017* | 0.02* | ||||
| Complete | 34 (54%) | 42 (75%) | 12 (44.4%) | 19 (76%) | ||
| Incomplete | 29 (46%) | 14 (25%) | 15 (55.6%) | 6 (24%) | ||
| Tumor margin | 0.017* | 0.001* | ||||
| Smooth | 29 (46%) | 38 (67.9%) | 7 (25.9%) | 18 (72%) | ||
| Non-smooth | 34 (54%) | 18 (32.1%) | 20 (74.1%) | 7 (28%) | ||
HBsAg, serum hepatitis B surface antigen; AFP, alpha-fetoprotein. *p < 0.05.
Figure 2Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves of AP, PVP, AVP and clinical independent predictors in the training (A) and validation (B) groups; Heat maps of these major parameters in the training (C) and validation (D) groups. AP, arterial phase; PVP, portal venous phase; AVP, arterial phase combined with portal venous phase. AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; Eg, Edmondson grade.
Figure 3Correlation coefficients of selected radiomic features.
Figure 4Rad-score between high and low Ki-67 expression groups in the training (A) and validation (B) groups. Rad-score of the high Ki-67 expression group (red) was significantly higher than that of the low Ki-67 expression group (blue).
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of the preoperative clinical and radiological features of training group.
| Variables | Univariate logistic regression | Multivariate logistic regression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
| |
| Age | 0.988 (0.956–1.021) | 0.476 | ||
| Sex | 1.118 (0.339–3.685) | 0.855 | ||
| HBs-Ag | 1.256 (0.520–3.034) | 0.613 | ||
| AFP | 3.423 (1.610–7.281) | 0.001* | 2.862 (1.299–6.306) | 0.009* |
| Tumor size | 0.850 (0.407–1.776) | 0.666 | ||
| cirrhosis | 1.801 (0.838–3.870) | 0.132 | ||
| Tumor capsule | 2.559 (1.171–5.592) | 0.019* | 0.840 (0.209–3.375) | 0.806 |
| Tumor margin | 2.475 (1.171–5.231) | 0.018* | 1.708 (0.662–4.406) | 0.268 |
| Edmondson grade | 4.030 (1.635–9.930) | 0.002* | 2.982 (1.164–7.638) | 0.023* |
HBsAg, serum hepatitis B surface antigen; AFP, alpha-fetoprotein. *p < 0.05.
Diagnostic performance of the various models.
| Models | Training group (n = 120) | Validation group (n = 52) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUC (95% CI) | Sensitivity | Specificity | AUC (95% CI) | Sensitivity | Specificity | |
| AFP | 0.647 (0.555–0.732) | 0.698 | 0.597 | 0.63 (0.485–0.760) | 0.741 | 0.52 |
| Eg | 0.628 (0.535–0.715) | 0.397 | 0.86 | 0.699 (0.556–0.819 | 0.519 | 0.88 |
| Rad-score | 0.854 (0.778–0.912) | 0.873 | 0.684 | 0.744 (0.604–0.855) | 0.667 | 0.8 |
| Nomogram | 0.884 (0.813–0.936) | 0.778 | 0.877 | 0.819 (0.688–0.912) | 0.741 | 0.84 |
AFP, alpha-fetoprotein; Eg, Edmondson grade.
Figure 5Radiomics nomogram (A) Calibration curve of the radiomics nomogram in training (B) and validation groups (C).
Figure 6AUCs of radiomics nomogram and radiomic signature in training (A) and validation (B) groups; Decision curve analysis curve of the nomogram in training (C) and validation groups (D). AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Figure 7The probability of high Ki-67 expression in the high-risk group was significantly higher than that in the low-risk group in the training (A) and validation (B) groups.