Cargando…

Comparison of radiomic feature aggregation methods for patients with multiple tumors

Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at analyzing diagnostic images to model cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine radiomic features in cancer patients with multifocal tumors. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chang, Enoch, Joel, Marina Z., Chang, Hannah Y., Du, Justin, Khanna, Omaditya, Omuro, Antonio, Chiang, Veronica, Aneja, Sanjay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8105371/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33963236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89114-6
_version_ 1783689597218193408
author Chang, Enoch
Joel, Marina Z.
Chang, Hannah Y.
Du, Justin
Khanna, Omaditya
Omuro, Antonio
Chiang, Veronica
Aneja, Sanjay
author_facet Chang, Enoch
Joel, Marina Z.
Chang, Hannah Y.
Du, Justin
Khanna, Omaditya
Omuro, Antonio
Chiang, Veronica
Aneja, Sanjay
author_sort Chang, Enoch
collection PubMed
description Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at analyzing diagnostic images to model cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine radiomic features in cancer patients with multifocal tumors. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a need for improving personalized patient-level prognosis to better inform treatment. We compared six mathematical methods of combining radiomic features of 3,596 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. 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. This finding was consistent when evaluating patients with different numbers of brain metastases and different tumor volumes. Radiomic features can be effectively combined to estimate 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 tumor types.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8105371
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81053712021-05-10 Comparison of radiomic feature aggregation methods for patients with multiple tumors Chang, Enoch Joel, Marina Z. Chang, Hannah Y. Du, Justin Khanna, Omaditya Omuro, Antonio Chiang, Veronica Aneja, Sanjay Sci Rep Article Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at analyzing diagnostic images to model cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine radiomic features in cancer patients with multifocal tumors. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a need for improving personalized patient-level prognosis to better inform treatment. We compared six mathematical methods of combining radiomic features of 3,596 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. 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. This finding was consistent when evaluating patients with different numbers of brain metastases and different tumor volumes. Radiomic features can be effectively combined to estimate 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 tumor types. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8105371/ /pubmed/33963236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89114-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Chang, Enoch
Joel, Marina Z.
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/PMC8105371/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33963236
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89114-6
work_keys_str_mv AT changenoch comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT joelmarinaz comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT changhannahy comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT dujustin comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT khannaomaditya comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT omuroantonio comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT chiangveronica comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors
AT anejasanjay comparisonofradiomicfeatureaggregationmethodsforpatientswithmultipletumors