26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Quantitative radiomics studies for tissue characterization: a review of technology and methodological procedures

      review-article
      , MSc 1 , , , MSc 2 , , MD, PhD 1 , , MD, PhD 1 , , PhD 1
      The British Journal of Radiology
      The British Institute of Radiology.

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Quantitative analysis of tumour characteristics based on medical imaging is an emerging field of research. In recent years, quantitative imaging features derived from CT, positron emission tomography and MR scans were shown to be of added value in the prediction of outcome parameters in oncology, in what is called the radiomics field. However, results might be difficult to compare owing to a lack of standardized methodologies to conduct quantitative image analyses. In this review, we aim to present an overview of the current challenges, technical routines and protocols that are involved in quantitative imaging studies. The first issue that should be overcome is the dependency of several features on the scan acquisition and image reconstruction parameters. Adopting consistent methods in the subsequent target segmentation step is evenly crucial. To further establish robust quantitative image analyses, standardization or at least calibration of imaging features based on different feature extraction settings is required, especially for texture- and filter-based features. Several open-source and commercial software packages to perform feature extraction are currently available, all with slightly different functionalities, which makes benchmarking quite challenging. The number of imaging features calculated is typically larger than the number of patients studied, which emphasizes the importance of proper feature selection and prediction model-building routines to prevent overfitting. Even though many of these challenges still need to be addressed before quantitative imaging can be brought into daily clinical practice, radiomics is expected to be a critical component for the integration of image-derived information to personalize treatment in the future.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Wrappers for feature subset selection

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors.

              The purpose of this article is to review the status and limitations of anatomic tumor response metrics including the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), and RECIST 1.1. This article also reviews qualitative and quantitative approaches to metabolic tumor response assessment with (18)F-FDG PET and proposes a draft framework for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST), version 1.0. PubMed searches, including searches for the terms RECIST, positron, WHO, FDG, cancer (including specific types), treatment response, region of interest, and derivative references, were performed. Abstracts and articles judged most relevant to the goals of this report were reviewed with emphasis on limitations and strengths of the anatomic and PET approaches to treatment response assessment. On the basis of these data and the authors' experience, draft criteria were formulated for PET tumor response to treatment. Approximately 3,000 potentially relevant references were screened. Anatomic imaging alone using standard WHO, RECIST, and RECIST 1.1 criteria is widely applied but still has limitations in response assessments. For example, despite effective treatment, changes in tumor size can be minimal in tumors such as lymphomas, sarcoma, hepatomas, mesothelioma, and gastrointestinal stromal tumor. CT tumor density, contrast enhancement, or MRI characteristics appear more informative than size but are not yet routinely applied. RECIST criteria may show progression of tumor more slowly than WHO criteria. RECIST 1.1 criteria (assessing a maximum of 5 tumor foci, vs. 10 in RECIST) result in a higher complete response rate than the original RECIST criteria, at least in lymph nodes. Variability appears greater in assessing progression than in assessing response. Qualitative and quantitative approaches to (18)F-FDG PET response assessment have been applied and require a consistent PET methodology to allow quantitative assessments. Statistically significant changes in tumor standardized uptake value (SUV) occur in careful test-retest studies of high-SUV tumors, with a change of 20% in SUV of a region 1 cm or larger in diameter; however, medically relevant beneficial changes are often associated with a 30% or greater decline. The more extensive the therapy, the greater the decline in SUV with most effective treatments. Important components of the proposed PERCIST criteria include assessing normal reference tissue values in a 3-cm-diameter region of interest in the liver, using a consistent PET protocol, using a fixed small region of interest about 1 cm(3) in volume (1.2-cm diameter) in the most active region of metabolically active tumors to minimize statistical variability, assessing tumor size, treating SUV lean measurements in the 1 (up to 5 optional) most metabolically active tumor focus as a continuous variable, requiring a 30% decline in SUV for "response," and deferring to RECIST 1.1 in cases that do not have (18)F-FDG avidity or are technically unsuitable. Criteria to define progression of tumor-absent new lesions are uncertain but are proposed. Anatomic imaging alone using standard WHO, RECIST, and RECIST 1.1 criteria have limitations, particularly in assessing the activity of newer cancer therapies that stabilize disease, whereas (18)F-FDG PET appears particularly valuable in such cases. The proposed PERCIST 1.0 criteria should serve as a starting point for use in clinical trials and in structured quantitative clinical reporting. Undoubtedly, subsequent revisions and enhancements will be required as validation studies are undertaken in varying diseases and treatments.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Br J Radiol
                Br J Radiol
                bjr
                The British Journal of Radiology
                The British Institute of Radiology.
                0007-1285
                1748-880X
                February 2017
                20 January 2017
                February 2017
                : 90
                : 1070
                : 20160665
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
                [ 2 ]Department of Oncology, Experimental Radiation Oncology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Mr Ruben T H M Larue. E-mail: ruben.larue@ 123456maastro.nl

                The authors Ruben THM Larue and Gilles Defraene contributed equally to the study.

                Article
                D16665
                10.1259/bjr.20160665
                5685111
                27936886
                61960d0d-ff62-48e7-a80d-8117ea9a01b0
                © 2016 The Authors. Published by the British Institute of Radiology

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : Received on August 5, 2016
                : Revised on October 28, 2016
                : Accepted on November 23, 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, References: 95, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Review Article
                Radiotherapy and Oncology
                Physics and Technology

                Radiology & Imaging
                Radiology & Imaging

                Comments

                Comment on this article