Literature DB >> 36044063

Principal component analysis of texture features for grading of meningioma: not effective from the peritumoral area but effective from the tumor area.

Teiji Tominaga1, Kei Takase2, Naoko Mori3, Shunji Mugikura2, Toshiki Endo1,4, Hidenori Endo1,5, Yo Oguma2, Li Li2, Akira Ito1, Mika Watanabe6, Masayuki Kanamori1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate whether texture features from tumor and peritumoral areas based on sequence combinations can differentiate between low- and non-low-grade meningiomas.
METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with meningioma by surgery (77 low-grade and 28 non-low-grade meningiomas) underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging including T1-weighted imaging (T1WI), T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and contrast-enhanced T1WI (CE-T1WI). Manual segmentation of the tumor area was performed to extract texture features. Segmentation of the peritumoral area was performed for peritumoral high-signal intensity (PHSI) on T2WI. Principal component analysis was performed to fuse the texture features to principal components (PCs), and PCs of each sequence of the tumor and peritumoral areas were compared between low- and non-low-grade meningiomas. Only PCs with statistical significance were used for the model construction using a support vector machine algorithm. k-fold cross-validation with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to evaluate diagnostic performance.
RESULTS: Two, one, and three PCs of T1WI, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and CE-T1WI, respectively, for the tumor area, were significantly different between low- and non-low-grade meningiomas, while PCs of T2WI for the tumor area and PCs for the peritumoral area were not. No significant differences were observed in PHSI. Among models of sequence combination, the model with PCs of ADC and CE-T1WI for the tumor area showed the highest area under the curve (0.84).
CONCLUSION: The model with PCs of ADC and CE-T1WI for the tumor area showed the highest diagnostic performance for differentiating between low- and non-low-grade meningiomas. Neither PHSI nor PCs in the peritumoral area showed added value.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Grades; Magnetic resonance imaging; Meningioma; Peritumoral; Texture analysis

Year:  2022        PMID: 36044063     DOI: 10.1007/s00234-022-03045-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroradiology        ISSN: 0028-3940            Impact factor:   2.995


  32 in total

1.  Scoring radiologic characteristics to predict proliferative potential in meningiomas.

Authors:  Tetsuo Hashiba; Naoya Hashimoto; Motohiko Maruno; Shuichi Izumoto; Tsuyoshi Suzuki; Naoki Kagawa; Toshiki Yoshimine
Journal:  Brain Tumor Pathol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.298

Review 2.  Diagnosis and treatment of atypical and anaplastic meningiomas: a review.

Authors:  Ashok Modha; Philip H Gutin
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 3.  The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary.

Authors:  David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison
Journal:  Acta Neuropathol       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 17.088

4.  Prediction of High-Grade Histology and Recurrence in Meningiomas Using Routine Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Dorothee Cäcilia Spille; Peter B Sporns; Katharina Heß; Walter Stummer; Benjamin Brokinkel
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 2.104

Review 5.  Diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic implications of the 2021 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system.

Authors:  Simon Gritsch; Tracy T Batchelor; L Nicolas Gonzalez Castro
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Management of atypical cranial meningiomas, part 2: predictors of progression and the role of adjuvant radiation after subtotal resection.

Authors:  Sam Q Sun; Chunyu Cai; Rory K J Murphy; Todd DeWees; Ralph G Dacey; Robert L Grubb; Keith M Rich; Gregory J Zipfel; Joshua L Dowling; Eric C Leuthardt; Jeffrey R Leonard; John Evans; Joseph R Simpson; Clifford G Robinson; Richard J Perrin; Jiayi Huang; Michael R Chicoine; Albert H Kim
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 7.  Epidemiology and etiology of meningioma.

Authors:  Joseph Wiemels; Margaret Wrensch; Elizabeth B Claus
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  A study of prognostic factors in 45 cases of atypical meningioma.

Authors:  Toshiki Endo; Ayumi Narisawa; Hosam Shata Mohamed Ali; Kensuke Murakami; Takashi Watanabe; Mika Watanabe; Hidefumi Jokura; Hidenori Endo; Miki Fujimura; Yukihiko Sonoda; Teiji Tominaga
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 2.216

Review 9.  EANO guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of meningiomas.

Authors:  Roland Goldbrunner; Giuseppe Minniti; Matthias Preusser; Michael D Jenkinson; Kita Sallabanda; Emmanuel Houdart; Andreas von Deimling; Pantelis Stavrinou; Florence Lefranc; Morten Lund-Johansen; Elizabeth Cohen-Jonathan Moyal; Dieta Brandsma; Roger Henriksson; Riccardo Soffietti; Michael Weller
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 41.316

10.  Survival impacts of extent of resection and adjuvant radiotherapy for the modern management of high-grade meningiomas.

Authors:  Depei Li; Pingping Jiang; Shijie Xu; Cong Li; Shaoyan Xi; Ji Zhang; Yinsheng Chen; Xiaobing Jiang; Xiangheng Zhang; Ke Sai; Jian Wang; Yonggao Mou; Chao Ke; Zhongping Chen
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 4.130

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.