Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33368399›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2021

Plausibility and redundancy analysis to select FDG-PET textural features in non-small cell lung cancer.

Elisabeth Pfaehler, Liesbet Mesotten, Ivan Zhovannik, Simone Pieplenbosch, Michiel Thomeer, Karolien Vanhove, Peter Adriaensens, Ronald Boellaard

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Using tumor habitat-derived radiomic analysis during pretreatmentCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Nuclear Medicine and Artificial Intelligence: Best Practices for Algorithm Development.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. A review on advances inInsights into imaging · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Elisabeth PfaehlerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Medical Imaging Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Liesbet MesottenFaculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Agoralaan building D, Diepenbeek, B-3590, Belgium.
Ivan ZhovannikDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Simone PieplenboschDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Medical Imaging Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Michiel ThomeerFaculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Agoralaan building D, Diepenbeek, B-3590, Belgium.
Karolien VanhoveFaculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, Hasselt University, Agoralaan building D, Diepenbeek, B-3590, Belgium.
Peter AdriaensensHasselt University, Institute for Materials Research (IMO) - Division Chemistry, Agoralaan Building D, Diepenbeek, B 3590, Belgium.
Ronald BoellaardDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Medical Imaging Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

Dutch Cancer Society 10034Netherlands Organisation for Scientific ResearchNWO | Stichting voor de Technische Wetenschappen (STW) 14929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadiomics refers to the extraction of a large number of image biomarker describing the tumor phenotype displayed in a medical image. Extracted from positron emission tomography (PET) images, radiomics showed diagnostic and prognostic value for several cancer types. However, a large number of radiomic features are nonreproducible or highly correlated with conventional PET metrics. Moreover, radiomic features used in the clinic should yield relevant information about tumor texture. In this study, we propose a framework to identify technical and clinical meaningful features and exemplify our results using a PET non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) dataset. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe proposed selection procedure consists of several steps. A priori, we only include features that were found to be reproducible in a multicenter setting. Next, we apply a voxel randomization step to identify features that reflect actual textural information, that is, that yield in 90% of the patient scans a value significantly different from random texture. Finally, the remaining features were correlated with standard PET metrics to further remove redundancy with common PET metrics. The selection procedure was performed for different volume ranges, that is, excluding lesions with smaller volumes in order to assess the effect of tumor size on the results. To exemplify our procedure, the selected features were used to predict 1-yr survival in a dataset of 150 NSCLC patients. A predictive model was built using volume as predictive factor for smaller, and one of the selected features as predictive factor for bigger lesions. The prediction accuracy of the both models were compared with the prediction accuracy of volume.

resultsThe number of selected features depended on the lesion size included in the analysis. When including the whole dataset, from 19 features reflecting actual texture only two were found to be not strongly correlated with conventional PET metrics. When excluding lesions smaller than 11.49 and 33.10 mL (25 and 50 percentile of the dataset), four out of 27 features and 13 out of 29 features remained after eliminating features highly correlated with standard PET metrics. When excluding lesions smaller than 103.9 mL (75 percentile), 33 out of 53 features remained. For larger lesions, some of these features outperformed volume in terms of classification accuracy (increase of 4-10%). The combination of using volume as predictor for smaller and one of the selected features for larger lesions also improved the accuracy when compared with volume only (increase from 72% to 76%).

conclusionWhen performing radiomic analysis for smaller lesions, it should be first carefully investigated if a textural feature reflects actual heterogeneity information. Next, verification of the absence of correlation with all conventional PET metrics is essential in order to assess the additional value of radiomic features. Radiomic analysis with lesions larger than 11.4 mL might give additional information to conventional metrics while at the same time reflecting actual tumor texture. Using a combination of volume and one of the selected features for prediction yields promise to increase accuracy and reliability of a radiomic model.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPositron-Emission TomographyReproducibility of ResultsTomography, X-Ray ComputedFluorodeoxyglucose F18clinical valuefeature selectionradiomics

Identifiers

PMID33368399
PMCPMC7985880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.