Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical Decision Support for Axillary Lymph Node Staging in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients Based on 18F-FDG PET/MRI and Machine Learning.
Morawitz, Janna; Sigl, Benjamin; Rubbert, Christian; Bruckmann, Nils-Martin; Dietzel, Frederic; Häberle, Lena J; Ting, Saskia; Mohrmann, Svjetlana; Ruckhäberle, Eugen; Bittner, Ann-Kathrin; Hoffmann, Oliver; Baltzer, Pascal; Kapetas, Panagiotis; Helbich, Thomas; Clauser, Paola; Fendler, Wolfgang P; Rischpler, Christoph; Herrmann, Ken; Schaarschmidt, Benedikt M; Stang, Andreas; Umutlu, Lale; Antoch, Gerald; Caspers, Julian; Kirchner, Julian.
Affiliation
  • Morawitz J; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; janna.morawitz@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
  • Sigl B; Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of General Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Rubbert C; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Bruckmann NM; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Dietzel F; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Häberle LJ; Institute of Pathology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University and University Hospital Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Ting S; Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University of Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany.
  • Mohrmann S; Department of Gynecology, University of Duesseldorf, Medical Faculty, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Ruckhäberle E; Department of Gynecology, University of Duesseldorf, Medical Faculty, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Bittner AK; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
  • Hoffmann O; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
  • Baltzer P; Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of General Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Kapetas P; Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of General Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Helbich T; Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of General Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Clauser P; Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of General Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Fendler WP; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany.
  • Rischpler C; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany.
  • Herrmann K; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany.
  • Schaarschmidt BM; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; and.
  • Stang A; Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry, and Epidemiology, Essen University Medical Center, Essen, Germany.
  • Umutlu L; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; and.
  • Antoch G; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Caspers J; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
  • Kirchner J; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, University of Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
J Nucl Med ; 64(2): 304-311, 2023 02.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36137756
ABSTRACT
In addition to its high prognostic value, the involvement of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients also plays an important role in therapy planning. Therefore, an imaging modality that can determine nodal status with high accuracy in patients with primary breast cancer is desirable. Our purpose was to investigate whether, in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, machine-learning prediction models based on simple assessable imaging features on MRI or PET/MRI are able to determine nodal status with performance comparable to that of experienced radiologists; whether such models can be adjusted to achieve low rates of false-negatives such that invasive procedures might potentially be omitted; and whether a clinical framework for decision support based on simple imaging features can be derived from these models.

Methods:

Between August 2017 and September 2020, 303 participants from 3 centers prospectively underwent dedicated whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI. Imaging datasets were evaluated for axillary lymph node metastases based on morphologic and metabolic features. Predictive models were developed for MRI and PET/MRI separately using random forest classifiers on data from 2 centers and were tested on data from the third center.

Results:

The diagnostic accuracy for MRI features was 87.5% both for radiologists and for the machine-learning algorithm. For PET/MRI, the diagnostic accuracy was 89.3% for the radiologists and 91.2% for the machine-learning algorithm, with no significant differences in diagnostic performance between radiologists and the machine-learning algorithm for MRI (P = 0.671) or PET/MRI (P = 0.683). The most important lymph node feature was tracer uptake, followed by lymph node size. With an adjusted threshold, a sensitivity of 96.2% was achieved by the random forest classifier, whereas specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 68.2%, 78.1%, 93.8%, and 83.3%, respectively. A decision tree based on 3 simple imaging features could be established for MRI and PET/MRI.

Conclusion:

Applying a high-sensitivity threshold to the random forest results might potentially avoid invasive procedures such as sentinel lymph node biopsy in 68.2% of the patients.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Breast Neoplasms / Decision Support Systems, Clinical Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Female / Humans Language: En Journal: J Nucl Med Year: 2023 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Breast Neoplasms / Decision Support Systems, Clinical Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Female / Humans Language: En Journal: J Nucl Med Year: 2023 Document type: Article
...