95
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The effect of SUV discretization in quantitative FDG-PET Radiomics: the need for standardized methodology in tumor texture analysis

      research-article

      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

          FDG-PET-derived textural features describing intra-tumor heterogeneity are increasingly investigated as imaging biomarkers. As part of the process of quantifying heterogeneity, image intensities (SUVs) are typically resampled into a reduced number of discrete bins. We focused on the implications of the manner in which this discretization is implemented. Two methods were evaluated: (1) R D, dividing the SUV range into D equally spaced bins, where the intensity resolution (i.e. bin size) varies per image; and (2) R B, maintaining a constant intensity resolution B. Clinical feasibility was assessed on 35 lung cancer patients, imaged before and in the second week of radiotherapy. Forty-four textural features were determined for different D and B for both imaging time points. Feature values depended on the intensity resolution and out of both assessed methods, R B was shown to allow for a meaningful inter- and intra-patient comparison of feature values. Overall, patients ranked differently according to feature values–which was used as a surrogate for textural feature interpretation–between both discretization methods. Our study shows that the manner of SUV discretization has a crucial effect on the resulting textural features and the interpretation thereof, emphasizing the importance of standardized methodology in tumor texture analysis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

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

            Intratumor heterogeneity characterized by textural features on baseline 18F-FDG PET images predicts response to concomitant radiochemotherapy in esophageal cancer.

            (18)F-FDG PET is often used in clinical routine for diagnosis, staging, and response to therapy assessment or prediction. The standardized uptake value (SUV) in the primary or regional area is the most common quantitative measurement derived from PET images used for those purposes. The aim of this study was to propose and evaluate new parameters obtained by textural analysis of baseline PET scans for the prediction of therapy response in esophageal cancer. Forty-one patients with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer treated with combined radiochemotherapy were included in this study. All patients underwent pretreatment whole-body (18)F-FDG PET. Patients were treated with radiotherapy and alkylatinlike agents (5-fluorouracil-cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil-carboplatin). Patients were classified as nonresponders (progressive or stable disease), partial responders, or complete responders according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Different image-derived indices obtained from the pretreatment PET tumor images were considered. These included usual indices such as maximum SUV, peak SUV, and mean SUV and a total of 38 features (such as entropy, size, and magnitude of local and global heterogeneous and homogeneous tumor regions) extracted from the 5 different textures considered. The capacity of each parameter to classify patients with respect to response to therapy was assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (P < 0.05). Specificity and sensitivity (including 95% confidence intervals) for each of the studied parameters were derived using receiver-operating-characteristic curves. Relationships between pairs of voxels, characterizing local tumor metabolic nonuniformities, were able to significantly differentiate all 3 patient groups (P < 0.0006). Regional measures of tumor characteristics, such as size of nonuniform metabolic regions and corresponding intensity nonuniformities within these regions, were also significant factors for prediction of response to therapy (P = 0.0002). Receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis showed that tumor textural analysis can provide nonresponder, partial-responder, and complete-responder patient identification with higher sensitivity (76%-92%) than any SUV measurement. Textural features of tumor metabolic distribution extracted from baseline (18)F-FDG PET images allow for the best stratification of esophageal carcinoma patients in the context of therapy-response prediction.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              CERR: a computational environment for radiotherapy research.

              A software environment is described, called the computational environment for radiotherapy research (CERR, pronounced "sir"). CERR partially addresses four broad needs in treatment planning research: (a) it provides a convenient and powerful software environment to develop and prototype treatment planning concepts, (b) it serves as a software integration environment to combine treatment planning software written in multiple languages (MATLAB, FORTRAN, C/C++, JAVA, etc.), together with treatment plan information (computed tomography scans, outlined structures, dose distributions, digital films, etc.), (c) it provides the ability to extract treatment plans from disparate planning systems using the widely available AAPM/RTOG archiving mechanism, and (d) it provides a convenient and powerful tool for sharing and reproducing treatment planning research results. The functional components currently being distributed, including source code, include: (1) an import program which converts the widely available AAPM/RTOG treatment planning format into a MATLAB cell-array data object, facilitating manipulation; (2) viewers which display axial, coronal, and sagittal computed tomography images, structure contours, digital films, and isodose lines or dose colorwash, (3) a suite of contouring tools to edit and/or create anatomical structures, (4) dose-volume and dose-surface histogram calculation and display tools, and (5) various predefined commands. CERR allows the user to retrieve any AAPM/RTOG key word information about the treatment plan archive. The code is relatively self-describing, because it relies on MATLAB structure field name definitions based on the AAPM/RTOG standard. New structure field names can be added dynamically or permanently. New components of arbitrary data type can be stored and accessed without disturbing system operation. CERR has been applied to aid research in dose-volume-outcome modeling, Monte Carlo dose calculation, and treatment planning optimization. In summary, CERR provides a powerful, convenient, and common framework which allows researchers to use common patient data sets, and compare and share research results.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group
                2045-2322
                05 August 2015
                2015
                : 5
                : 11075
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+) , Maastricht, the Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Departments of Radiation Oncology and Radiology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA, USA
                [4 ]Department of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute , Tampa, FL, USA
                Author notes
                Article
                srep11075
                10.1038/srep11075
                4525145
                26242464
                9acd7765-c2cf-41f8-a1ea-ff55a83c9322
                Copyright © 2015, Macmillan Publishers Limited

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 04 November 2014
                : 13 May 2015
                Categories
                Article

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article