Stability of FDG-PET Radiomics features: An integrated analysis of test-retest and inter-observer variability

Acta Oncologica

Volumn 52, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 1391-1397

  Leijenaar, Ralph T H ^a   Carvalho, Sara ^a   Velazquez, Emmanuel Rios ^a   Van Elmpt, Wouter J C ^a   Parmar, Chintan ^a   Hoekstra, Otto S ^b   Hoekstra, Corneline J ^c   Boellaard, Ronald ^b   Dekker, André L A J ^a   Gillies, Robert J ^d   Aerts, Hugo J W L ^a,e   Lambin, Philippe ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c JEROEN BOSCH HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^d H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^e BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MEASUREMENT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT MONITORING; PET SCANNER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE; CANCER PATIENT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; HISTOGRAM; LUNG LESION; NON SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER; TUMOR VOLUME; WHOLE BODY PET; WHOLE BODY TOMOGRAPHY;

CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; OBSERVER VARIATION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, IMAGE-GUIDED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84884562832     PISSN: 0284186X     EISSN: 1651226X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2013.812798     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Lin P, Koh ES, Lin M, Vinod SK, Ho-Shon I, Yap J, et al. Diagnostic and staging impact of radiotherapy planning FDG-PET-CT in non-small-cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2011;101:284-90
2. De Ruysscher D, Nestle U, Jeraj R, Macmanus M. PET scans in radiotherapy planning of lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2012;75:141-5
3. Van Elmpt W, Pottgen C, De Ruysscher D. Therapy response assessment in radiotherapy of lung cancer. Q J Nucl Med MoLimaging 2011;55:648-54
4. Thie J. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, anDimplications for usage. J Nucl Med 2004; 45:1431-4
5. van Elmpt W, Ollers M, Dingemans AM, Lambin P, De Ruysscher D. Response assessment using 18F-FDG PET early in the course of radiotherapy correlates with survivaLin advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2012;53:1514-20
6. Takeda A, Yokosuka N, Ohashi T, Kunieda E, Fujii H, Aoki Y, et al. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on FDG-PET is a strong predictor of local recurrence for localized non-small-cell lung cancer after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Radiother Oncol 2011;101:291-7
7. Velazquez ER, Aerts HJ, Oberije C, De Ruysscher D, Lambin P. Prediction of residual metabolic activity after treatment in NSCLC patients. Acta Oncol 2010;49:1033-9
8. Vaidya M, Creach KM, Frye J, Dehdashti F, Bradley JD, El Naqa I. Combined PET/CT image characteristics for radiotherapy tumor response in lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2012;102:239-45
9. Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Hatt M, Albarghach N, Pradier O, Metges JP, et al. Intratumor heterogeneity characterized by textural features on baseline 18F-FDG PET images predicts response to concomitant radiochemotherapy in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 2011;52:369-78
10. El Naqa I, Grigsby P, Apte A, KidDe, DonnellYe, Khullar D, et al. Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes. Pattern Recognit 2009;42:1162-71
11. Buckler AJ, Bresolin L, Dunnick NR, Sullivan DC. Quantitative imaging test approval and biomarker qualification: Interrelated but distinct activities. Radiology 2011;259: 875-84
12. Lambin P, van Stiphout RG, Starmans MH, Rios-Velazquez E, Nalbantov G, Aerts HJ, et al. Predicting outcomes in radiation oncology-multifactorial decision support systems. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2013;10:27-40
13. Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, Carvalho S, van Stiphout RG, Granton P, et al. Radiomics: Extracting more information from medicaLimages using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer 2012;48:441-6
14. Kumar V, Gu Y, Basu S, Berglund A, Eschrich SA, Schabath MB, et al. Radiomics: The process and the challenges. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:1234-48
15. Delangen AJ, Vincent A, Velasquez LM, van Tinteren H, Boellaard R, Shankar LK, et al. Repeatability of 18F-FDGuptake measurements in tumors: A metaanalysis. J Nucl Med 2012;53:701-8
16. Tixier F, Hatt M, Le Rest CC, Le Pogam A, Corcos L, Visvikis D. Reproducibility of tumor uptake heterogeneity characterization through textural feature analysis in 18FFDG PET. J Nucl Med 2012;53:693-700
17. Galavis PE, Hollensen C, Jallow N, Paliwal B, Jeraj R. V ariability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters. Acta Oncol 2010;49:1012-6
18. Frings V, Delangen AJ, Smit EF, van Velden FH, Hoekstra OS, van Tinteren H, et al. Repeatability of metabolically active volume measurements with 18F-FDG and 18F-FLT PET in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2010;51:1870-7
19. Cheebsumon P, Boellaard R, de Ruysscher D, van Elmpt W, van Baardwijk A, Yaqub M, et al. Assessment of tumour size in PET/CT lung cancer studies: PET-and CT-based methods compared to pathology. EJNMMI Res 2012;2:56
20. van Baardwijk A, Bosmans G, Boersma L, Buijsen J, Wanders S, Hochstenbag M, et al. PET-CT-based autocontouring in non-small-cell lung cancer correlates with pathology and reduces interobserver variability in the delineation of the primary tumor anDinvolved nodal volumes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;68:771-8
21. Deasy JO, Blanco AI, Clark VH. CERR: A computationaLenvironment for radiotherapy research. Med Phys 2003;30: 979-85
22. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I. Textural features of image classification. IEEE T Syst Man Cyb 1973; SMC-3:610-21
23. Galloway M. Texture analysis using gray level run lengths. Comput VisioNgraph 1975;4:172-9
24. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420-8
25. Bland J, Altman D. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. J Biopharm Stat 2007;17:571-82