ABSTRACT
Filters are commonly used to enhance specific structures and patterns in images, such as vessels or peritumoral regions, to enable clinical insights beyond the visible image using radiomics. However, their lack of standardization restricts reproducibility and clinical translation of radiomics decision support tools. In this special report, teams of researchers who developed radiomics software participated in a three-phase study (September 2020 to December 2022) to establish a standardized set of filters. The first two phases focused on finding reference filtered images and reference feature values for commonly used convolutional filters: mean, Laplacian of Gaussian, Laws and Gabor kernels, separable and nonseparable wavelets (including decomposed forms), and Riesz transformations. In the first phase, 15 teams used digital phantoms to establish 33 reference filtered images of 36 filter configurations. In phase 2, 11 teams used a chest CT image to derive reference values for 323 of 396 features computed from filtered images using 22 filter and image processing configurations. Reference filtered images and feature values for Riesz transformations were not established. Reproducibility of standardized convolutional filters was validated on a public data set of multimodal imaging (CT, fluorodeoxyglucose PET, and T1-weighted MRI) in 51 patients with soft-tissue sarcoma. At validation, reproducibility of 486 features computed from filtered images using nine configurations × three imaging modalities was assessed using the lower bounds of 95% CIs of intraclass correlation coefficients. Out of 486 features, 458 were found to be reproducible across nine teams with lower bounds of 95% CIs of intraclass correlation coefficients greater than 0.75. In conclusion, eight filter types were standardized with reference filtered images and reference feature values for verifying and calibrating radiomics software packages. A web-based tool is available for compliance checking.
Subject(s)
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted , Radiomics , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Biomarkers , Multimodal ImagingABSTRACT
The field of radiomics continues to converge on a standardised approach to image processing and feature extraction. Conventional radiomics requires a segmentation. Certain features can be sensitive to small contour variations. The industry standard for medical image communication stores contours as coordinate points that must be converted to a binary mask before image processing can take place. This study investigates the impact that the process of converting contours to mask can have on radiomic features calculation. To this end we used a popular open dataset for radiomics standardisation and we compared the impact of masks generated by importing the dataset into 4 medical imaging software. We interfaced our previously standardised radiomics platform with these software using their published application programming interface to access image volume, masks and other data needed to calculate features. Additionally, we used super-sampling strategies to systematically evaluate the impact of contour data pre processing methods on radiomic features calculation. Finally, we evaluated the effect that using different mask generation approaches could have on patient clustering in a multi-center radiomics study. The study shows that even when working on the same dataset, mask and feature discrepancy occurs depending on the contour to mask conversion technique implemented in various medical imaging software. We show that this also affects patient clustering and potentially radiomic-based modelling in multi-centre studies where a mix of mask generation software is used. We provide recommendations to negate this issue and facilitate reproducible and reliable radiomics.
Subject(s)
Algorithms , Software , Humans , Cluster Analysis , Communication , Image Processing, Computer-AssistedABSTRACT
The aim of this work was to investigate radiomic analysis of contrast and non-contrast enhanced planning CT images of oesophageal cancer (OC) patients in terms of stability, dimensionality and contrast agent dependency. The prognostic significance of CT-based radiomic features was also evaluated. Different 2D and 3D radiomic features were extracted from contrast and non-contrast enhanced CT images of 213 patients from the multi-centre SCOPE1 randomised controlled trial (RCT) in OC. Feature stability was evaluated by randomly dividing patients into three groups and identifying textures with similar distributions among groups with a Kruskal-Wallis analysis. A paired two-sided Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to assess for significant differences in the remaining corresponding 2D and 3D stable features. A prognostic model was constructed using clinical characteristics and remaining filtered features. The discriminative ability of significant variables was tested using Kaplan-Meier analysis. A total of 238 2D and 3D radiomic features were computed from oesophageal CT images. More than 75 features were stable if extracted from homogeneous cohort (contrast or non-contrast enhanced CT images) and inhomogeneous cohort (contrast and non-contrast enhanced CT images). Among the remaining corresponding stable features computed from both cohorts, only 4 features did not show a statistically significant difference if obtained in 2D or in 3D (p-value < 0.05). A Cox regression model constructed using 5 clinical variables (age, sex, tumour, node and metastasis (TNM) stage, WHO performance status and contrast administration) and 4 radiomic variables (inverse varianceGLCM, large distance emphasisGLDZM, zone distance non uniformity normGLDZM, zone distance varianceGLDZM), identified one radiomic feature (zone distance varianceGLDZM) that was significantly associated with overall survival (p-value = 0.032, HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.02-1.52). A significant difference in overall survival between groups was found when considering a threshold of zone distance varianceGLDZM equals to 1.70 (X2 = 7.692, df = 1, p-value = 0.006). Zone distance varianceGLDZM was identified as the only stable CT radiomic feature statistically correlated with overall survival, independent of dimensionality and contrast administration. This feature was able to identify high-risk patients and if validated, could be the subject of a future clinical trial aiming to improve clinical decision making and personalise OC treatment.
Subject(s)
Contrast Media/chemistry , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Humans , Imaging, Three-Dimensional , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Metastasis , Neoplasm Staging , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Radiographic Image Enhancement , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retrospective Studies , Survival RateABSTRACT
Radiomic studies link quantitative imaging features to patient outcomes in an effort to personalise treatment in oncology. To be clinically useful, a radiomic feature must be robust to image processing steps, which has made robustness testing a necessity for many technical aspects of feature extraction. We assessed the stability of radiomic features to interpolation processing and categorised features based on stable, systematic, or unstable responses. Here, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET images for 441 oesophageal cancer patients (split: testing = 353, validation = 88) were resampled to 6 isotropic voxel sizes (1.5 mm, 1.8 mm, 2.0 mm, 2.2 mm, 2.5 mm, 2.7 mm) and 141 features were extracted from each volume of interest (VOI). Features were categorised into four groups with two statistical tests. Feature reliability was analysed using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and patient ranking consistency was assessed using a Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ). We categorised 93 features robust and 6 limited robustness (stable responses), 34 potentially correctable (systematic responses), and 8 not robust (unstable responses). We developed a correction technique for features with potential systematic variation that used surface fits to link voxel size and percentage change in feature value. Twenty-nine potentially correctable features were re-categorised to robust for the validation dataset, after applying corrections defined by surface fits generated on the testing dataset. Furthermore, we found the choice of interpolation algorithm alone (spline vs trilinear) resulted in large variation in values for a number of features but the response categorisations remained constant. This study attempted to quantify the diverse response of radiomics features commonly found in 18F-FDG PET clinical modelling to isotropic voxel size interpolation.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/pathology , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/metabolism , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Positron-Emission Tomography/methods , Radiopharmaceuticals/metabolism , Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Adenocarcinoma/metabolism , Algorithms , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Esophageal Neoplasms/metabolism , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma/metabolism , Humans , Phantoms, ImagingABSTRACT
AIM: Enhanced prognostic models are required to improve risk stratification of patients with oesophageal cancer so treatment decisions can be optimised. The primary aim was to externally validate a published prognostic model incorporating PET image features. Transferability of the model was compared using only clinical variables. METHODS: This was a Transparent Reporting of a multivariate prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) type 3 study. The model was validated against patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to the Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS) trial regimen using pre- and post-harmonised image features. The Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank significance tests assessed risk strata discrimination. A Cox proportional hazards model assessed model calibration. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2015, 449 patients were included in the development (nâ¯=â¯302), internal validation (nâ¯=â¯101) and external validation (nâ¯=â¯46) cohorts. No statistically significant difference in OS between patient quartiles was demonstrated in prognostic models incorporating PET image features (X2â¯=â¯1.42, dfâ¯=â¯3, pâ¯=â¯0.70) or exclusively clinical variables (age, disease stage and treatment; X2â¯=â¯1.19, dfâ¯=â¯3, pâ¯=â¯0.75). The calibration slope ß of both models was not significantly different from unity (pâ¯=â¯0.29 and 0.29, respectively). Risk groups defined using only clinical variables suggested differences in OS, although these were not statistically significant (X2â¯=â¯0.71, dfâ¯=â¯2, pâ¯=â¯0.70). CONCLUSION: The prognostic model did not enable significant discrimination between the validation risk groups, but a second model with exclusively clinical variables suggested some transferable prognostic ability. PET harmonisation did not significantly change the results of model validation.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chemoradiotherapy , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Staging , Positron-Emission Tomography/methods , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
Purpose: Radiation-induced lung disease (RILD), defined as dyspnea in this study, is a risk for patients receiving high-dose thoracic irradiation. This study is a TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of A Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis) Type 4 validation of previously-published dyspnea models via secondary analysis of esophageal cancer SCOPE1 trial data. We quantify the predictive performance of these two models for predicting the maximal dyspnea grade ≥ 2 within 6 months after the end of high-dose chemo-radiotherapy for primary esophageal cancer. Materials and methods: We tested the performance of two previously published dyspnea risk models using baseline, treatment and follow-up data on 258 esophageal cancer patients in the UK enrolled into the SCOPE1 multi-center trial. The tested models were developed from lung cancer patients treated at MAASTRO Clinic (The Netherlands) from the period 2002 to 2011. The adverse event of interest was dyspnea ≥ Grade 2 (CTCAE v3) within 6 months after the end of radiotherapy. As some variables were missing randomly and cannot be imputed, 212 patients in the SCOPE1 were used for validation of model 1 and 255 patients were used for validation of model 2. The model parameter Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 s (FEV1), as a predictor to both validated models, was imputed using the WHO performance status. External validation was performed using an automated, decentralized approach, without exchange of individual patient data. Results: Out of 258 patients with esophageal cancer in SCOPE1 trial data, 38 patients (14.7%) developed radiation-induced dyspnea (≥ Grade 2) within 6 months after chemo-radiotherapy. The discrimination performance of the models in esophageal cancer patients treated with high-dose external beam radiotherapy was moderate, area under curve (AUC) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.55-0.76) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.58-0.77), respectively. The curves and AUCs derived by distributed learning were identical to the results from validation on a local host. Conclusion: We have externally validated previously published dyspnea models using an esophageal cancer dataset. FEV1 that is not routinely measured for esophageal cancer was imputed using WHO performance status. Prediction performance was not statistically different from previous training and validation sets. Risk estimates were dominated by WHO score in Model 1 and baseline dyspnea in Model 2. The distributed learning approach gave the same answer as local processing, and could be performed without accessing a validation site's individual patients-level data.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Prognosis in oesophageal cancer (OC) is poor. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate is approximately 15%. Personalised medicine is hoped to increase the 5- and 10-year OS rates. Quantitative analysis of PET is gaining substantial interest in prognostic research but requires the accurate definition of the metabolic tumour volume. This study compares prognostic models developed in the same patient cohort using individual PET segmentation algorithms and assesses the impact on patient risk stratification. Consecutive patients (n = 427) with biopsy-proven OC were included in final analysis. All patients were staged with PET/CT between September 2010 and July 2016. Nine automatic PET segmentation methods were studied. All tumour contours were subjectively analysed for accuracy, and segmentation methods with < 90% accuracy were excluded. Standardised image features were calculated, and a series of prognostic models were developed using identical clinical data. The proportion of patients changing risk classification group were calculated. RESULTS: Out of nine PET segmentation methods studied, clustering means (KM2), general clustering means (GCM3), adaptive thresholding (AT) and watershed thresholding (WT) methods were included for analysis. Known clinical prognostic factors (age, treatment and staging) were significant in all of the developed prognostic models. AT and KM2 segmentation methods developed identical prognostic models. Patient risk stratification was dependent on the segmentation method used to develop the prognostic model with up to 73 patients (17.1%) changing risk stratification group. CONCLUSION: Prognostic models incorporating quantitative image features are dependent on the method used to delineate the primary tumour. This has a subsequent effect on risk stratification, with patients changing groups depending on the image segmentation method used.