Cargando…

Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES: To investigate a previously developed radiomics-based biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) approach for discrimination of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer (PZ csPCa) using multi-center, multi-vendor (McMv) and single-center, single-vendor (ScSv) datasets....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bleker, Jeroen, Yakar, Derya, van Noort, Bram, Rouw, Dennis, de Jong, Igle Jan, Dierckx, Rudi A. J. O., Kwee, Thomas C., Huisman, Henkjan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8531183/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34674058
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01099-y
_version_ 1784586797491159040
author Bleker, Jeroen
Yakar, Derya
van Noort, Bram
Rouw, Dennis
de Jong, Igle Jan
Dierckx, Rudi A. J. O.
Kwee, Thomas C.
Huisman, Henkjan
author_facet Bleker, Jeroen
Yakar, Derya
van Noort, Bram
Rouw, Dennis
de Jong, Igle Jan
Dierckx, Rudi A. J. O.
Kwee, Thomas C.
Huisman, Henkjan
author_sort Bleker, Jeroen
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To investigate a previously developed radiomics-based biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) approach for discrimination of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer (PZ csPCa) using multi-center, multi-vendor (McMv) and single-center, single-vendor (ScSv) datasets. METHODS: This study’s starting point was a previously developed ScSv algorithm for PZ csPCa whose performance was demonstrated in a single-center dataset. A McMv dataset was collected, and 262 PZ PCa lesions (9 centers, 2 vendors) were selected to identically develop a multi-center algorithm. The single-center algorithm was then applied to the multi-center dataset (single–multi-validation), and the McMv algorithm was applied to both the multi-center dataset (multi–multi-validation) and the previously used single-center dataset (multi–single-validation). The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the validations were compared using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Previously the single–single validation achieved an AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.71–0.92), a significant performance reduction of 27.2% compared to the single–multi-validation AUC of 0.59 (95% CI 0.51–0.68). The new multi-center model achieved a multi–multi-validation AUC of 0.75 (95% CI 0.64–0.84). Compared to the multi–single-validation AUC of 0.66 (95% CI 0.56–0.75), the performance did not decrease significantly (p value: 0.114). Bootstrapped comparison showed similar single-center performances and a significantly different multi-center performance (p values: 0.03, 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: A single-center trained radiomics-based bpMRI model does not generalize to multi-center data. Multi-center trained radiomics-based bpMRI models do generalize, have equal single-center performance and perform better on multi-center data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-021-01099-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8531183
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85311832021-11-04 Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer Bleker, Jeroen Yakar, Derya van Noort, Bram Rouw, Dennis de Jong, Igle Jan Dierckx, Rudi A. J. O. Kwee, Thomas C. Huisman, Henkjan Insights Imaging Original Article OBJECTIVES: To investigate a previously developed radiomics-based biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) approach for discrimination of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer (PZ csPCa) using multi-center, multi-vendor (McMv) and single-center, single-vendor (ScSv) datasets. METHODS: This study’s starting point was a previously developed ScSv algorithm for PZ csPCa whose performance was demonstrated in a single-center dataset. A McMv dataset was collected, and 262 PZ PCa lesions (9 centers, 2 vendors) were selected to identically develop a multi-center algorithm. The single-center algorithm was then applied to the multi-center dataset (single–multi-validation), and the McMv algorithm was applied to both the multi-center dataset (multi–multi-validation) and the previously used single-center dataset (multi–single-validation). The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the validations were compared using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Previously the single–single validation achieved an AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.71–0.92), a significant performance reduction of 27.2% compared to the single–multi-validation AUC of 0.59 (95% CI 0.51–0.68). The new multi-center model achieved a multi–multi-validation AUC of 0.75 (95% CI 0.64–0.84). Compared to the multi–single-validation AUC of 0.66 (95% CI 0.56–0.75), the performance did not decrease significantly (p value: 0.114). Bootstrapped comparison showed similar single-center performances and a significantly different multi-center performance (p values: 0.03, 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: A single-center trained radiomics-based bpMRI model does not generalize to multi-center data. Multi-center trained radiomics-based bpMRI models do generalize, have equal single-center performance and perform better on multi-center data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-021-01099-y. Springer International Publishing 2021-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8531183/ /pubmed/34674058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01099-y Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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 Original Article
Bleker, Jeroen
Yakar, Derya
van Noort, Bram
Rouw, Dennis
de Jong, Igle Jan
Dierckx, Rudi A. J. O.
Kwee, Thomas C.
Huisman, Henkjan
Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
title Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
title_full Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
title_fullStr Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
title_short Single-center versus multi-center biparametric MRI radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
title_sort single-center versus multi-center biparametric mri radiomics approach for clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8531183/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34674058
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01099-y
work_keys_str_mv AT blekerjeroen singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT yakarderya singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT vannoortbram singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT rouwdennis singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT dejongiglejan singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT dierckxrudiajo singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT kweethomasc singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer
AT huismanhenkjan singlecenterversusmulticenterbiparametricmriradiomicsapproachforclinicallysignificantperipheralzoneprostatecancer