Cargando…
Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors
BACKGROUND: Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at modeling cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine these radiomic features in patients with multifocal disease. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7654896/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33173902 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.04.20226159 |
_version_ | 1783608136167325696 |
---|---|
author | Chang, Enoch Joel, Marina Chang, Hannah Y. Du, Justin Khanna, Omaditya Omuro, Antonio Chiang, Veronica Aneja, Sanjay |
author_facet | Chang, Enoch Joel, Marina Chang, Hannah Y. Du, Justin Khanna, Omaditya Omuro, Antonio Chiang, Veronica Aneja, Sanjay |
author_sort | Chang, Enoch |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at modeling cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine these radiomic features in patients with multifocal disease. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a need for improving personalized patient-level prognostication to better inform treatment. METHODS: We compared six mathematical methods of combining radiomic features of 3596 tumors in 831 patients with multiple brain metastases and evaluated the performance of these aggregation methods using three survival models: a standard Cox proportional hazards model, a Cox proportional hazards model with LASSO regression, and a random survival forest. RESULTS: Across all three survival models, the weighted average of the largest three metastases had the highest concordance index (95% confidence interval) of 0.627 (0.595-0.661) for the Cox proportional hazards model, 0.628 (0.591-0.666) for the Cox proportional hazards model with LASSO regression, and 0.652 (0.565-0.727) for the random survival forest model. CONCLUSIONS: Radiomic features can be effectively combined to establish patient-level outcomes in patients with multifocal brain metastases. Future studies are needed to confirm that the volume-weighted average of the largest three tumors is an effective method for combining radiomic features across other imaging modalities and disease sites. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7654896 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76548962020-11-11 Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors Chang, Enoch Joel, Marina Chang, Hannah Y. Du, Justin Khanna, Omaditya Omuro, Antonio Chiang, Veronica Aneja, Sanjay medRxiv Article BACKGROUND: Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at modeling cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine these radiomic features in patients with multifocal disease. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a need for improving personalized patient-level prognostication to better inform treatment. METHODS: We compared six mathematical methods of combining radiomic features of 3596 tumors in 831 patients with multiple brain metastases and evaluated the performance of these aggregation methods using three survival models: a standard Cox proportional hazards model, a Cox proportional hazards model with LASSO regression, and a random survival forest. RESULTS: Across all three survival models, the weighted average of the largest three metastases had the highest concordance index (95% confidence interval) of 0.627 (0.595-0.661) for the Cox proportional hazards model, 0.628 (0.591-0.666) for the Cox proportional hazards model with LASSO regression, and 0.652 (0.565-0.727) for the random survival forest model. CONCLUSIONS: Radiomic features can be effectively combined to establish patient-level outcomes in patients with multifocal brain metastases. Future studies are needed to confirm that the volume-weighted average of the largest three tumors is an effective method for combining radiomic features across other imaging modalities and disease sites. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2020-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7654896/ /pubmed/33173902 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.04.20226159 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/) , which allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. |
spellingShingle | Article Chang, Enoch Joel, Marina Chang, Hannah Y. Du, Justin Khanna, Omaditya Omuro, Antonio Chiang, Veronica Aneja, Sanjay Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors |
title | Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors |
title_full | Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors |
title_short | Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors |
title_sort | comparison of radiomic feature aggregation methods for patients with multiple tumors |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7654896/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33173902 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.04.20226159 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT changenoch comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT joelmarina comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT changhannahy comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT dujustin comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT khannaomaditya comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT omuroantonio comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT chiangveronica comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors AT anejasanjay comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors |