Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26936718›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2016

Dynamic fractal signature dissimilarity analysis for therapeutic response assessment using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.

Chunhao Wang, Ergys Subashi, Fang-Fang Yin, Zheng Chang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Are radiomics features universally applicable to different organs?Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Clinical impact of variability on CT radiomics and suggestions for suitable feature selection: a focus on lung cancer.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2019
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chunhao WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710.
Ergys SubashiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710.
Fang-Fang YinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710.
Zheng ChangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710.
Duke Medical Center · US

Funding

INTEGRATED CENTER FOR IN VIVO MICROSCOPYP41EB015897 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JOHNSON, GEORGE ALLAN · 2012 to 2017
$7.4M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB015897
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop a dynamic fractal signature dissimilarity (FSD) method as a novel image texture analysis technique for the quantification of tumor heterogeneity information for better therapeutic response assessment with dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI.

methodsA small animal antiangiogenesis drug treatment experiment was used to demonstrate the proposed method. Sixteen LS-174T implanted mice were randomly assigned into treatment and control groups (n = 8/group). All mice received bevacizumab (treatment) or saline (control) three times in two weeks, and one pretreatment and two post-treatment DCE-MRI scans were performed. In the proposed dynamic FSD method, a dynamic FSD curve was generated to characterize the heterogeneity evolution during the contrast agent uptake, and the area under FSD curve (AUCFSD) and the maximum enhancement (MEFSD) were selected as representative parameters. As for comparison, the pharmacokinetic parameter K(trans) map and area under MR intensity enhancement curve AUCMR map were calculated. Besides the tumor's mean value and coefficient of variation, the kurtosis, skewness, and classic Rényi dimensions d1 and d2 of K(trans) and AUCMR maps were evaluated for heterogeneity assessment for comparison. For post-treatment scans, the Mann-Whitney U-test was used to assess the differences of the investigated parameters between treatment/control groups. The support vector machine (SVM) was applied to classify treatment/control groups using the investigated parameters at each post-treatment scan day.

resultsThe tumor mean K(trans) and its heterogeneity measurements d1 and d2 values showed significant differences between treatment/control groups in the second post-treatment scan. In contrast, the relative values (in reference to the pretreatment value) of AUCFSD and MEFSD in both post-treatment scans showed significant differences between treatment/control groups. When using AUCFSD and MEFSD as SVM input for treatment/control classification, the achieved accuracies were 93.8% and 93.8% at first and second post-treatment scan days, respectively. In comparison, the classification accuracies using d1 and d2 of K(trans) map were 87.5% and 100% at first and second post-treatment scan days, respectively.

conclusionsAs quantitative metrics of tumor contrast agent uptake heterogeneity, the selected parameters from the dynamic FSD method accurately captured the therapeutic response in the experiment. The potential application of the proposed method is promising, and its addition to the existing DCE-MRI techniques could improve DCE-MRI performance in early assessment of treatment response.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaFractalsMagnetic Resonance ImagingAnimalsBevacizumabFeasibility StudiesFemaleGadolinium DTPAImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMiceNeoplasmsSupport Vector MachineTreatment OutcomeBevacizumabContrast MediaGadolinium DTPA

Identifiers

PMID26936718
PMCPMC4760981
OpenAlexW2284905555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.