Literature DB >> 36131163

Hepatocellular carcinoma pathologic grade prediction using radiomics and machine learning models of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI: a two-center study.

Yeo Eun Han1, Yongwon Cho1,2, Min Ju Kim3, Beom Jin Park1, Deuk Jae Sung1, Na Yeon Han1, Ki Choon Sim1, Yang Shin Park4, Bit Na Park4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop a radiomics-based hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) grade classifier model based on data from gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI.
METHODS: This retrospective study included 137 patients who underwent hepatectomy for a single HCC and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI within 60 days before surgery. HCC grade was categorized as low or high (modified Edmondson-Steiner grade I-II vs. III-IV). We used the hepatobiliary phase (HBP), portal venous phase, T2-weighted image(T2WI), and T1-weighted image(T1WI). From the volume of interest in HCC, 833 radiomic features were extracted. Radiomic and clinical features were selected using a random forest regressor, and the classification model was trained and validated using a random forest classifier and tenfold stratified cross-validation. Eight models were developed using the radiomic features alone or by combining the radiomic and clinical features. Models were validated with internal enrolled data (internal validation) and a dataset (28 patients) at a separate institution (external validation). The area under the curve (AUC) of the validation results was compared using the DeLong test.
RESULTS: In internal and external validation, the HBP radiomics-only model showed the highest AUC (internal 0.80 ± 0.09, external 0.70 ± 0.09). In external validation, all models showed lower AUC than those for internal validation, while the T2WI and T1WI models failed to predict the HCC grade (AUC 0.30-0.58) in contrast to the internal validation results (AUC 0.67-0.78).
CONCLUSION: The radiomics-based machine learning model from gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver MRI could distinguish between low- and high-grade HCCs. The radiomics-only HBP model showed the best AUC among the eight models, good performance in internal validation, and fair performance in external validation.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Carcinoma; Hepatocellular; Machine learning; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoplasm grading

Year:  2022        PMID: 36131163     DOI: 10.1007/s00261-022-03679-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)


  34 in total

1.  Prediction of the histopathological grade of hepatocellular carcinoma using qualitative diffusion-weighted, dynamic, and hepatobiliary phase MRI.

Authors:  Chansik An; Mi-Suk Park; Hyae-Min Jeon; Yeo-Eun Kim; Woo-Suk Chung; Yong Eun Chung; Myeong-Jin Kim; Ki Whang Kim
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Satellite lesions in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma with reference to clinicopathologic features.

Authors:  Takuji Okusaka; Shuichi Okada; Hideki Ueno; Masafumi Ikeda; Kazuaki Shimada; Junji Yamamoto; Tomoo Kosuge; Susumu Yamasaki; Noriyoshi Fukushima; Michiie Sakamoto
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 3.  Current status of imaging biomarkers predicting the biological nature of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Norihide Yoneda; Osamu Matsui; Satoshi Kobayashi; Azusa Kitao; Kazuto Kozaka; Dai Inoue; Kotaro Yoshida; Tetsuya Minami; Wataru Koda; Toshifumi Gabata
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Preoperative prediction for pathological grade of hepatocellular carcinoma via machine learning-based radiomics.

Authors:  Bing Mao; Lianzhong Zhang; Peigang Ning; Feng Ding; Fatian Wu; Gary Lu; Yayuan Geng; Jingdong Ma
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Primary Living-donor Liver Transplantation Is Not the Optimal Treatment Choice in Patients With Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Poor Tumor Biology.

Authors:  M-S Park; K-W Lee; H Kim; Y R Choi; G Hong; N-J Yi; K-S Suh
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.066

6.  Clinicopathologic features of poorly differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Koichi Oishi; Toshiyuki Itamoto; Hironobu Amano; Saburo Fukuda; Hideki Ohdan; Hirotaka Tashiro; Fumio Shimamoto; Toshimasa Asahara
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 3.454

7.  Prediction of recurrence after curative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma using liver stiffness measurement (FibroScan®).

Authors:  Kyu Sik Jung; Seung Up Kim; Gi Hong Choi; Jun Yong Park; Young Nyun Park; Do Young Kim; Sang Hoon Ahn; Chae Yoon Chon; Kyung Sik Kim; Eun Hee Choi; Jin Sub Choi; Kwang-Hyub Han
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  Risk factors for early recurrence of small hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection.

Authors:  Yan-Ming Zhou; Jia-Mei Yang; Bin Li; Zheng-Feng Yin; Feng Xu; Bin Wang; Wen Xu; Tong Kan
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int       Date:  2010-02

Review 9.  Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Reflects Tumor Grading and Microvascular Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Alexey Surov; Maciej Pech; Jazan Omari; Frank Fischbach; Robert Damm; Katharina Fischbach; Maciej Powerski; Borna Relja; Andreas Wienke
Journal:  Liver Cancer       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 11.740

Review 10.  Selecting patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplantation: incorporating tumor biology criteria.

Authors:  Víctor Amado; Manuel Rodríguez-Perálvarez; Gustavo Ferrín; Manuel De la Mata
Journal:  J Hepatocell Carcinoma       Date:  2018-12-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.