Magnetic resonance imaging-based prediction models for differentiating intraspinal schwannomas from meningiomas: classification and regression tree and random forest analysis.

ABSTRACT

Background: Due to the variations in surgical approaches and prognosis between intraspinal schwannomas and meningiomas, it is crucial to accurately differentiate between the two prior to surgery. Currently, there is limited research exploring the implementation of machine learning (ML) methods for distinguishing between these two types of tumors. This study aimed to establish a classification and regression tree (CART) model and a random forest (RF) model for distinguishing schwannomas from meningiomas. Methods: We retrospectively collected 88 schwannomas (52 males and 36 females) and 51 meningiomas (10 males and 41 females) who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations prior to the surgery. Simple clinical data and MRI imaging features, including age, sex, tumor location and size, T1-weighted images (T1WI) and T2-weighted images (T2WI) signal characteristics, degree and pattern of enhancement, dural tail sign, ginkgo leaf sign, and intervertebral foramen widening (IFW), were reviewed. Finally, a CART model and RF model were established based on the aforementioned features to evaluate their effectiveness in differentiating between the two types of tumors. Meanwhile, we also compared the performance of the ML models to the radiologists. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were used to evaluate the models and clinicians' discrimination performance. Results: Our investigation reveals significant variations in ten out of 11 variables in the training group and five out of 11 variables in the test group when comparing schwannomas and meningiomas (P<0.05). Ultimately, the CART model incorporated five variables enhancement pattern, the presence of IFW, tumor location, maximum diameter, and T2WI signal intensity (SI). The RF model combined all 11 variables. The CART model, RF model, radiologist 1, and radiologist 2 achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.890, 0.956, 0.681, and 0.723 in the training group, and 0.838, 0.922, 0.580, and 0.659 in the test group, respectively. Conclusions: The RF prediction model exhibits more exceptional performance than an experienced radiologist in discriminating intraspinal schwannomas from meningiomas. The RF model seems to be better in discriminating the two tumors than the CART model.