Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35267597›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Segmentation Uncertainty Estimation as a Sanity Check for Image Biomarker Studies.

Ivan Zhovannik, Dennis Bontempi, Alessio Romita, Elisabeth Pfaehler, Sergey Primakov, Andre Dekker, Johan Bussink, Alberto Traverso, René Monshouwer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

9 authors.

Ivan ZhovannikDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5649-6648
Dennis BontempiDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), School for Oncology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Center, 6229 ET Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Alessio RomitaDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), School for Oncology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Center, 6229 ET Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Elisabeth PfaehlerDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), School for Oncology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Center, 6229 ET Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Sergey PrimakovThe D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, GROW-School for Oncology, Maastricht University, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Andre DekkerDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), School for Oncology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Center, 6229 ET Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Johan BussinkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5751-4796
Alberto TraversoDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), School for Oncology (GROW), Maastricht University Medical Center, 6229 ET Maastricht, The Netherlands.
René MonshouwerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

Dutch Research Council 14930
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Problem. Image biomarker analysis, also known as radiomics, is a tool for tissue characterization and treatment prognosis that relies on routinely acquired clinical images and delineations. Due to the uncertainty in image acquisition, processing, and segmentation (delineation) protocols, radiomics often lack reproducibility. Radiomics harmonization techniques have been proposed as a solution to reduce these sources of uncertainty and/or their influence on the prognostic model performance. A relevant question is how to estimate the protocol-induced uncertainty of a specific image biomarker, what the effect is on the model performance, and how to optimize the model given the uncertainty. Methods. Two non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohorts, composed of 421 and 240 patients, respectively, were used for training and testing. Per patient, a Monte Carlo algorithm was used to generate three hundred synthetic contours with a surface dice tolerance measure of less than 1.18 mm with respect to the original GTV. These contours were subsequently used to derive 104 radiomic features, which were ranked on their relative sensitivity to contour perturbation, expressed in the parameter η. The top four (low η) and the bottom four (high η) features were selected for two models based on the Cox proportional hazards model. To investigate the influence of segmentation uncertainty on the prognostic model, we trained and tested the setup in 5000 augmented realizations (using a Monte Carlo sampling method); the log-rank test was used to assess the stratification performance and stability of segmentation uncertainty. Results. Although both low and high η setup showed significant testing set log-rank p-values (p = 0.01) in the original GTV delineations (without segmentation uncertainty introduced), in the model with high uncertainty, to effect ratio, only around 30% of the augmented realizations resulted in model performance with p < 0.05 in the test set. In contrast, the low η setup performed with a log-rank p < 0.05 in 90% of the augmented realizations. Moreover, the high η setup classification was uncertain in its predictions for 50% of the subjects in the testing set (for 80% agreement rate), whereas the low η setup was uncertain only in 10% of the cases. Discussion. Estimating image biomarker model performance based only on the original GTV segmentation, without considering segmentation, uncertainty may be deceiving. The model might result in a significant stratification performance, but can be unstable for delineation variations, which are inherent to manual segmentation. Simulating segmentation uncertainty using the method described allows for more stable image biomarker estimation, selection, and model development. The segmentation uncertainty estimation method described here is universal and can be extended to estimate other protocol uncertainties (such as image acquisition and pre-processing).

Indexed as

image biomarkersprognostic modelingradiomicsradiomics harmonizationuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID35267597
PMCPMC8909427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.