Cargando…

Integrated prognostication of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma by contrast-enhanced computed tomography: the adjunct yield of radiomics

PURPOSE: To test radiomics for prognostication of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) and to develop a comprehensive risk model. METHODS: Histologically proven IMCC (representing the full range of stages) were retrospectively analyzed by volume segmentation on baseline hepatic venous...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Mario, Maddalo, Michele, Leoni, Eleonora, Giuliotti, Sara, Milanese, Gianluca, Ghetti, Caterina, Biasini, Elisabetta, De Filippo, Massimo, Missale, Gabriele, Sverzellati, Nicola
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8435517/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34165602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03183-9
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To test radiomics for prognostication of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) and to develop a comprehensive risk model. METHODS: Histologically proven IMCC (representing the full range of stages) were retrospectively analyzed by volume segmentation on baseline hepatic venous phase computed tomography (CT), by two readers with different experience (R1 and R2). Morphological CT features included: tumor size, hepatic satellite lesions, lymph node and distant metastases. Radiomic features (RF) were compared across CT protocols and readers. Univariate analysis against overall survival (OS) warranted ranking and selection of RF into radiomic signature (RSign), which was dichotomized into high and low-risk strata (RSign*). Models without and with RSign* (Model 1 and 2, respectively) were compared. RESULTS: Among 78 patients (median follow-up 262 days, IQR 73–957), 62/78 (79%) died during the study period, 46/78 (59%) died within 1 year. Up to 10% RF showed variability across CT protocols; 37/108 (34%) RF showed variability due to manual segmentation. RSign stratified OS (univariate: HR 1.37 for R1, HR 1.28 for R2), RSign* was different between readers (R1 0.39; R2 0.57). Model 1 showed AUC 0.71, which increased in Model 2: AUC 0.81 (p < 0.001) and AIC 89 for R1, AUC 0.81 (p = 0.001) and AIC 90.2 for R2. CONCLUSION: The use of RF into a unified RSign score stratified OS in patients with IMCC. Dichotomized RSign* classified survival strata, its inclusion in risk models showed adjunct yield. The cut-off value of RSign* was different between readers, suggesting that the use of reference values is hampered by interobserver variability. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00261-021-03183-9.