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....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |