Cargando…
A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images
PURPOSE: To compare a deep learning model with a radiomics model in differentiating high-grade (LR-3, LR-4, LR-5) liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) liver tumors from low-grade (LR-1, LR-2) LI-RADS tumors based on the contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. METHODS: Magnetic reso...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9753333/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36517762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00946-8 |
_version_ | 1784850941450649600 |
---|---|
author | Du, Lixin Yuan, Jianpeng Gan, Meng Li, Zhigang Wang, Pan Hou, Zujun Wang, Cong |
author_facet | Du, Lixin Yuan, Jianpeng Gan, Meng Li, Zhigang Wang, Pan Hou, Zujun Wang, Cong |
author_sort | Du, Lixin |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To compare a deep learning model with a radiomics model in differentiating high-grade (LR-3, LR-4, LR-5) liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) liver tumors from low-grade (LR-1, LR-2) LI-RADS tumors based on the contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging scans of 361 suspected hepatocellular carcinoma patients were retrospectively reviewed. Lesion volume segmentation was manually performed by two radiologists, resulting in 426 lesions from the training set and 83 lesions from the test set. The radiomics model was constructed using a support vector machine (SVM) with pre-defined features, which was first selected using Chi-square test, followed by refining using binary least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. The deep learning model was established based on the DenseNet. Performance of the models was quantified by area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and F1-score. RESULTS: A set of 8 most informative features was selected from 1049 features to train the SVM classifier. The AUCs of the radiomics model were 0.857 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.816–0.888) for the training set and 0.879 (95% CI 0.779–0.935) for the test set. The deep learning method achieved AUCs of 0.838 (95% CI 0.799–0.871) for the training set and 0.717 (95% CI 0.601–0.814) for the test set. The performance difference between these two models was assessed by t-test, which showed the results in both training and test sets were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The deep learning based model can be trained end-to-end with little extra domain knowledge, while the radiomics model requires complex feature selection. However, this process makes the radiomics model achieve better performance in this study with smaller computational cost and more potential on model interpretability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9753333 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97533332022-12-16 A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images Du, Lixin Yuan, Jianpeng Gan, Meng Li, Zhigang Wang, Pan Hou, Zujun Wang, Cong BMC Med Imaging Research PURPOSE: To compare a deep learning model with a radiomics model in differentiating high-grade (LR-3, LR-4, LR-5) liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) liver tumors from low-grade (LR-1, LR-2) LI-RADS tumors based on the contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging scans of 361 suspected hepatocellular carcinoma patients were retrospectively reviewed. Lesion volume segmentation was manually performed by two radiologists, resulting in 426 lesions from the training set and 83 lesions from the test set. The radiomics model was constructed using a support vector machine (SVM) with pre-defined features, which was first selected using Chi-square test, followed by refining using binary least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression. The deep learning model was established based on the DenseNet. Performance of the models was quantified by area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and F1-score. RESULTS: A set of 8 most informative features was selected from 1049 features to train the SVM classifier. The AUCs of the radiomics model were 0.857 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.816–0.888) for the training set and 0.879 (95% CI 0.779–0.935) for the test set. The deep learning method achieved AUCs of 0.838 (95% CI 0.799–0.871) for the training set and 0.717 (95% CI 0.601–0.814) for the test set. The performance difference between these two models was assessed by t-test, which showed the results in both training and test sets were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The deep learning based model can be trained end-to-end with little extra domain knowledge, while the radiomics model requires complex feature selection. However, this process makes the radiomics model achieve better performance in this study with smaller computational cost and more potential on model interpretability. BioMed Central 2022-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9753333/ /pubmed/36517762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00946-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 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/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Du, Lixin Yuan, Jianpeng Gan, Meng Li, Zhigang Wang, Pan Hou, Zujun Wang, Cong A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images |
title | A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images |
title_full | A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images |
title_fullStr | A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images |
title_short | A comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced MR images |
title_sort | comparative study between deep learning and radiomics models in grading liver tumors using hepatobiliary phase contrast-enhanced mr images |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9753333/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36517762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00946-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dulixin acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT yuanjianpeng acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT ganmeng acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT lizhigang acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT wangpan acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT houzujun acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT wangcong acomparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT dulixin comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT yuanjianpeng comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT ganmeng comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT lizhigang comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT wangpan comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT houzujun comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages AT wangcong comparativestudybetweendeeplearningandradiomicsmodelsingradinglivertumorsusinghepatobiliaryphasecontrastenhancedmrimages |