Cargando…

Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer

INTRODUCTION: “Radiomics” extracts and mines a large number of medical imaging features in a non-invasive and cost-effective way. The underlying assumption of radiomics is that these imaging features quantify phenotypic characteristics of an entire tumor. In order to enhance applicability of radiomi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parmar, Chintan, Grossmann, Patrick, Rietveld, Derek, Rietbergen, Michelle M., Lambin, Philippe, Aerts, Hugo J. W. L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4668290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26697407
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2015.00272
_version_ 1782403961855148032
author Parmar, Chintan
Grossmann, Patrick
Rietveld, Derek
Rietbergen, Michelle M.
Lambin, Philippe
Aerts, Hugo J. W. L.
author_facet Parmar, Chintan
Grossmann, Patrick
Rietveld, Derek
Rietbergen, Michelle M.
Lambin, Philippe
Aerts, Hugo J. W. L.
author_sort Parmar, Chintan
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: “Radiomics” extracts and mines a large number of medical imaging features in a non-invasive and cost-effective way. The underlying assumption of radiomics is that these imaging features quantify phenotypic characteristics of an entire tumor. In order to enhance applicability of radiomics in clinical oncology, highly accurate and reliable machine-learning approaches are required. In this radiomic study, 13 feature selection methods and 11 machine-learning classification methods were evaluated in terms of their performance and stability for predicting overall survival in head and neck cancer patients. METHODS: Two independent head and neck cancer cohorts were investigated. Training cohort HN1 consisted of 101 head and neck cancer patients. Cohort HN2 (n = 95) was used for validation. A total of 440 radiomic features were extracted from the segmented tumor regions in CT images. Feature selection and classification methods were compared using an unbiased evaluation framework. RESULTS: We observed that the three feature selection methods minimum redundancy maximum relevance (AUC = 0.69, Stability = 0.66), mutual information feature selection (AUC = 0.66, Stability = 0.69), and conditional infomax feature extraction (AUC = 0.68, Stability = 0.7) had high prognostic performance and stability. The three classifiers BY (AUC = 0.67, RSD = 11.28), RF (AUC = 0.61, RSD = 7.36), and NN (AUC = 0.62, RSD = 10.52) also showed high prognostic performance and stability. Analysis investigating performance variability indicated that the choice of classification method is the major factor driving the performance variation (29.02% of total variance). CONCLUSION: Our study identified prognostic and reliable machine-learning methods for the prediction of overall survival of head and neck cancer patients. Identification of optimal machine-learning methods for radiomics-based prognostic analyses could broaden the scope of radiomics in precision oncology and cancer care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4668290
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46682902015-12-22 Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer Parmar, Chintan Grossmann, Patrick Rietveld, Derek Rietbergen, Michelle M. Lambin, Philippe Aerts, Hugo J. W. L. Front Oncol Oncology INTRODUCTION: “Radiomics” extracts and mines a large number of medical imaging features in a non-invasive and cost-effective way. The underlying assumption of radiomics is that these imaging features quantify phenotypic characteristics of an entire tumor. In order to enhance applicability of radiomics in clinical oncology, highly accurate and reliable machine-learning approaches are required. In this radiomic study, 13 feature selection methods and 11 machine-learning classification methods were evaluated in terms of their performance and stability for predicting overall survival in head and neck cancer patients. METHODS: Two independent head and neck cancer cohorts were investigated. Training cohort HN1 consisted of 101 head and neck cancer patients. Cohort HN2 (n = 95) was used for validation. A total of 440 radiomic features were extracted from the segmented tumor regions in CT images. Feature selection and classification methods were compared using an unbiased evaluation framework. RESULTS: We observed that the three feature selection methods minimum redundancy maximum relevance (AUC = 0.69, Stability = 0.66), mutual information feature selection (AUC = 0.66, Stability = 0.69), and conditional infomax feature extraction (AUC = 0.68, Stability = 0.7) had high prognostic performance and stability. The three classifiers BY (AUC = 0.67, RSD = 11.28), RF (AUC = 0.61, RSD = 7.36), and NN (AUC = 0.62, RSD = 10.52) also showed high prognostic performance and stability. Analysis investigating performance variability indicated that the choice of classification method is the major factor driving the performance variation (29.02% of total variance). CONCLUSION: Our study identified prognostic and reliable machine-learning methods for the prediction of overall survival of head and neck cancer patients. Identification of optimal machine-learning methods for radiomics-based prognostic analyses could broaden the scope of radiomics in precision oncology and cancer care. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4668290/ /pubmed/26697407 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2015.00272 Text en Copyright © 2015 Parmar, Grossmann, Rietveld, Rietbergen, Lambin and Aerts. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Parmar, Chintan
Grossmann, Patrick
Rietveld, Derek
Rietbergen, Michelle M.
Lambin, Philippe
Aerts, Hugo J. W. L.
Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer
title Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer
title_full Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer
title_fullStr Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer
title_short Radiomic Machine-Learning Classifiers for Prognostic Biomarkers of Head and Neck Cancer
title_sort radiomic machine-learning classifiers for prognostic biomarkers of head and neck cancer
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4668290/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26697407
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2015.00272
work_keys_str_mv AT parmarchintan radiomicmachinelearningclassifiersforprognosticbiomarkersofheadandneckcancer
AT grossmannpatrick radiomicmachinelearningclassifiersforprognosticbiomarkersofheadandneckcancer
AT rietveldderek radiomicmachinelearningclassifiersforprognosticbiomarkersofheadandneckcancer
AT rietbergenmichellem radiomicmachinelearningclassifiersforprognosticbiomarkersofheadandneckcancer
AT lambinphilippe radiomicmachinelearningclassifiersforprognosticbiomarkersofheadandneckcancer
AT aertshugojwl radiomicmachinelearningclassifiersforprognosticbiomarkersofheadandneckcancer