Blog
About

2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative: Standardized Quantitative Radiomics for High-Throughput Image-based Phenotyping

      , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

      Radiology

      Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Background Radiomic features may quantify characteristics present in medical imaging. However, the lack of standardized definitions and validated reference values have hampered clinical use. Purpose To standardize a set of 174 radiomic features. Materials and Methods Radiomic features were assessed in three phases. In phase I, 487 features were derived from the basic set of 174 features. Twenty-five research teams with unique radiomics software implementations computed feature values directly from a digital phantom, without any additional image processing. In phase II, 15 teams computed values for 1347 derived features using a CT image of a patient with lung cancer and predefined image processing configurations. In both phases, consensus among the teams on the validity of tentative reference values was measured through the frequency of the modal value and classified as follows: less than three matches, weak; three to five matches, moderate; six to nine matches, strong; 10 or more matches, very strong. In the final phase (phase III), a public data set of multimodality images (CT, fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET, and T1-weighted MRI) from 51 patients with soft-tissue sarcoma was used to prospectively assess reproducibility of standardized features. Results Consensus on reference values was initially weak for 232 of 302 features (76.8%) at phase I and 703 of 1075 features (65.4%) at phase II. At the final iteration, weak consensus remained for only two of 487 features (0.4%) at phase I and 19 of 1347 features (1.4%) at phase II. Strong or better consensus was achieved for 463 of 487 features (95.1%) at phase I and 1220 of 1347 features (90.6%) at phase II. Overall, 169 of 174 features were standardized in the first two phases. In the final validation phase (phase III), most of the 169 standardized features could be excellently reproduced (166 with CT; 164 with PET; and 164 with MRI). Conclusion A set of 169 radiomics features was standardized, which enabled verification and calibration of different radiomics software. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Kuhl and Truhn in this issue.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 17

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

          The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA): maintaining and operating a public information repository.

          The National Institutes of Health have placed significant emphasis on sharing of research data to support secondary research. Investigators have been encouraged to publish their clinical and imaging data as part of fulfilling their grant obligations. Realizing it was not sufficient to merely ask investigators to publish their collection of imaging and clinical data, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) created the open source National Biomedical Image Archive software package as a mechanism for centralized hosting of cancer related imaging. NCI has contracted with Washington University in Saint Louis to create The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA)-an open-source, open-access information resource to support research, development, and educational initiatives utilizing advanced medical imaging of cancer. In its first year of operation, TCIA accumulated 23 collections (3.3 million images). Operating and maintaining a high-availability image archive is a complex challenge involving varied archive-specific resources and driven by the needs of both image submitters and image consumers. Quality archives of any type (traditional library, PubMed, refereed journals) require management and customer service. This paper describes the management tasks and user support model for TCIA.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A radiomics model from joint FDG-PET and MRI texture features for the prediction of lung metastases in soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremities

            This study aims at developing a joint FDG-PET and MRI texture-based model for the early evaluation of lung metastasis risk in soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs). We investigate if the creation of new composite textures from the combination of FDG-PET and MR imaging information could better identify aggressive tumours. Towards this goal, a cohort of 51 patients with histologically proven STSs of the extremities was retrospectively evaluated. All patients had pre-treatment FDG-PET and MRI scans comprised of T1-weighted and T2-weighted fat-suppression sequences (T2FS). Nine non-texture features (SUV metrics and shape features) and forty-one texture features were extracted from the tumour region of separate (FDG-PET, T1 and T2FS) and fused (FDG-PET/T1 and FDG-PET/T2FS) scans. Volume fusion of the FDG-PET and MRI scans was implemented using the wavelet transform. The influence of six different extraction parameters on the predictive value of textures was investigated. The incorporation of features into multivariable models was performed using logistic regression. The multivariable modeling strategy involved imbalance-adjusted bootstrap resampling in the following four steps leading to final prediction model construction: (1) feature set reduction; (2) feature selection; (3) prediction performance estimation; and (4) computation of model coefficients. Univariate analysis showed that the isotropic voxel size at which texture features were extracted had the most impact on predictive value. In multivariable analysis, texture features extracted from fused scans significantly outperformed those from separate scans in terms of lung metastases prediction estimates. The best performance was obtained using a combination of four texture features extracted from FDG-PET/T1 and FDG-PET/T2FS scans. This model reached an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.984 ± 0.002, a sensitivity of 0.955 ± 0.006, and a specificity of 0.926 ± 0.004 in bootstrapping evaluations. Ultimately, lung metastasis risk assessment at diagnosis of STSs could improve patient outcomes by allowing better treatment adaptation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Tumor texture analysis in 18F-FDG PET: relationships between texture parameters, histogram indices, standardized uptake values, metabolic volumes, and total lesion glycolysis.

              Texture indices are of growing interest for tumor characterization in (18)F-FDG PET. Yet, on the basis of results published in the literature so far, it is unclear which indices should be used, what they represent, and how they relate to conventional indices such as standardized uptake values (SUVs), metabolic volume (MV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG). We investigated in detail 31 texture indices, 5 first-order statistics (histogram indices) derived from the gray-level histogram of the tumor region, and their relationship with SUV, MV, and TLG in 3 different tumor types. Three patient groups corresponding to 3 cancer types at baseline were studied independently: patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (72 lesions), non-small cell lung cancer (24 lesions), and breast cancer (54 lesions). Thirty-one texture indices were studied in addition to SUVs, MV, and TLG, and 5 indices extracted from histogram analysis were also investigated. The relationships between indices were studied as well as the robustness of the various texture indices with respect to the parameters involved in the calculation method (sampling schemes and tumor volume of interest). Regardless of the patient group, many indices were highly correlated (Pearson correlation coefficient |r| ≥ 0.80), making it desirable to focus on only a few uncorrelated indices. Three histogram indices were highly correlated with SUVs (|r| ≥ 0.84). Four texture indices were highly correlated with MV, and none was highly correlated with SUVs (|r| ≤ 0.55). The resampling formula used to calculate texture indices had a substantial impact, and resampling using at least 32 discrete values should be used for texture indices calculation. The texture indices change as a function of the segmentation method was higher than that of peak and maximum SUVs but less than mean SUV for 5 texture indices and was larger than that of MV for 14 texture indices and for the 5 histogram indices. All these results were extremely consistent across the 3 tumor types and explained many of the observations reported in the literature so far. None of the histogram indices and only 17 of 31 texture indices were robust with respect to the tumor-segmentation method. An appropriate resampling formula with at least 32 gray levels should be used to avoid introducing a misleading relationship between texture indices and SUV. Some texture indices are highly correlated or strongly correlate with MV whatever the tumor type. Such correlation should be accounted for when interpreting the usefulness of texture indices for tumor characterization, which might call for systematic multivariate analyses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Radiology
                Radiology
                Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
                0033-8419
                1527-1315
                March 10 2020
                : 191145
                Article
                10.1148/radiol.2020191145
                7193906
                32154773
                © 2020
                Product

                Comments

                Comment on this article