Cargando…

Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hypoxia Positron-Emission-Tomography (PET) as well as Computed Tomography (CT) radiomics have been shown to be prognostic for radiotherapy outcome. Here, we investigate the stratification potential of CT-radiomics in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients and test if CT-radiomic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Socarrás Fernández, Jairo A, Mönnich, David, Leibfarth, Sara, Welz, Stefan, Zwanenburg, Alex, Leger, Stefan, Löck, Steffen, Pfannenberg, Christina, La Fougère, Christian, Reischl, Gerald, Baumann, Michael, Zips, Daniel, Thorwarth, Daniela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7536307/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33043157
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2020.07.003
_version_ 1783590538838016000
author Socarrás Fernández, Jairo A
Mönnich, David
Leibfarth, Sara
Welz, Stefan
Zwanenburg, Alex
Leger, Stefan
Löck, Steffen
Pfannenberg, Christina
La Fougère, Christian
Reischl, Gerald
Baumann, Michael
Zips, Daniel
Thorwarth, Daniela
author_facet Socarrás Fernández, Jairo A
Mönnich, David
Leibfarth, Sara
Welz, Stefan
Zwanenburg, Alex
Leger, Stefan
Löck, Steffen
Pfannenberg, Christina
La Fougère, Christian
Reischl, Gerald
Baumann, Michael
Zips, Daniel
Thorwarth, Daniela
author_sort Socarrás Fernández, Jairo A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hypoxia Positron-Emission-Tomography (PET) as well as Computed Tomography (CT) radiomics have been shown to be prognostic for radiotherapy outcome. Here, we investigate the stratification potential of CT-radiomics in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients and test if CT-radiomics is a surrogate predictor for hypoxia as identified by PET. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent cohorts of HNC patients were used for model development and validation, HN1 (n = 149) and HN2 (n = 47). The training set HN1 consisted of native planning CT data whereas for the validation cohort HN2 also hypoxia PET/CT data was acquired using [(18)F]-Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO). Machine learning algorithms including feature engineering and classifier selection were trained for two-year loco-regional control (LRC) to create optimal CT-radiomics signatures. Secondly, a pre-defined [(18)F]FMISO-PET tumour-to-muscle-ratio (TMR(peak) ≥ 1.6) was used for LRC prediction. Comparison between risk groups identified by CT-radiomics or [(18)F]FMISO-PET was performed using area-under–the-curve (AUC) and Kaplan-Meier analysis including log-rank test. RESULTS: The best performing CT-radiomics signature included two features with nearest-neighbour classification (AUC = 0.76 ± 0.09), whereas AUC was 0.59 for external validation. In contrast, [(18)F]FMISO TMR(peak) reached an AUC of 0.66 in HN2. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the independent validation cohort HN2 did not confirm the prognostic value of CT-radiomics (p = 0.18), whereas for [(18)F]FMISO-PET significant differences were observed (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: No direct correlation of patient stratification using [(18)F]FMISO-PET or CT-radiomics was found in this study. Risk groups identified by CT-radiomics or hypoxia PET showed only poor overlap. Direct assessment of tumour hypoxia using PET seems to be more powerful to stratify HNC patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7536307
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75363072020-10-07 Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy() Socarrás Fernández, Jairo A Mönnich, David Leibfarth, Sara Welz, Stefan Zwanenburg, Alex Leger, Stefan Löck, Steffen Pfannenberg, Christina La Fougère, Christian Reischl, Gerald Baumann, Michael Zips, Daniel Thorwarth, Daniela Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Original Research Article BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hypoxia Positron-Emission-Tomography (PET) as well as Computed Tomography (CT) radiomics have been shown to be prognostic for radiotherapy outcome. Here, we investigate the stratification potential of CT-radiomics in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients and test if CT-radiomics is a surrogate predictor for hypoxia as identified by PET. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent cohorts of HNC patients were used for model development and validation, HN1 (n = 149) and HN2 (n = 47). The training set HN1 consisted of native planning CT data whereas for the validation cohort HN2 also hypoxia PET/CT data was acquired using [(18)F]-Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO). Machine learning algorithms including feature engineering and classifier selection were trained for two-year loco-regional control (LRC) to create optimal CT-radiomics signatures. Secondly, a pre-defined [(18)F]FMISO-PET tumour-to-muscle-ratio (TMR(peak) ≥ 1.6) was used for LRC prediction. Comparison between risk groups identified by CT-radiomics or [(18)F]FMISO-PET was performed using area-under–the-curve (AUC) and Kaplan-Meier analysis including log-rank test. RESULTS: The best performing CT-radiomics signature included two features with nearest-neighbour classification (AUC = 0.76 ± 0.09), whereas AUC was 0.59 for external validation. In contrast, [(18)F]FMISO TMR(peak) reached an AUC of 0.66 in HN2. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the independent validation cohort HN2 did not confirm the prognostic value of CT-radiomics (p = 0.18), whereas for [(18)F]FMISO-PET significant differences were observed (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: No direct correlation of patient stratification using [(18)F]FMISO-PET or CT-radiomics was found in this study. Risk groups identified by CT-radiomics or hypoxia PET showed only poor overlap. Direct assessment of tumour hypoxia using PET seems to be more powerful to stratify HNC patients. Elsevier 2020-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7536307/ /pubmed/33043157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2020.07.003 Text en © 2020 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Socarrás Fernández, Jairo A
Mönnich, David
Leibfarth, Sara
Welz, Stefan
Zwanenburg, Alex
Leger, Stefan
Löck, Steffen
Pfannenberg, Christina
La Fougère, Christian
Reischl, Gerald
Baumann, Michael
Zips, Daniel
Thorwarth, Daniela
Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
title Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
title_full Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
title_fullStr Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
title_short Comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
title_sort comparison of patient stratification by computed tomography radiomics and hypoxia positron emission tomography in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy()
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7536307/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33043157
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2020.07.003
work_keys_str_mv AT socarrasfernandezjairoa comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT monnichdavid comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT leibfarthsara comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT welzstefan comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT zwanenburgalex comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT legerstefan comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT locksteffen comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT pfannenbergchristina comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT lafougerechristian comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT reischlgerald comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT baumannmichael comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT zipsdaniel comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy
AT thorwarthdaniela comparisonofpatientstratificationbycomputedtomographyradiomicsandhypoxiapositronemissiontomographyinheadandneckcancerradiotherapy