A Radio-genomics Approach for Identifying High Risk Estrogen Receptor-positive Breast Cancers on DCE-MRI: Preliminary Results in Predicting OncotypeDX Risk Scores

Scientific Reports

Volumn 6, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Wan, Tao ^a,b,c   Bloch, B Nicolas ^c   Plecha, Donna ^d   Thompson, CheryI L ^e   Gilmore, Hannah ^e   Jaffe, Carl ^c   Harris, Lyndsay ^f   Madabhushi, Anant ^b  

^a BEIHANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b Case Western Reserve University   (United States)

^c BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS OF CLEVELAND   (United States)

^e CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f Seidman Cancer Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST TUMOR; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; GENETICS; GENOMICS; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GENOMICS; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84958581520     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep21394     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Jordan, V. C. Tamoxifen (ICI46, 474) as a targeted therapy to treat and prevent breast cancer. Br. J. Pharmacol. 147, S269-S276 (2006).
2. Mokbel, K. The evolving role of aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer. Int. J. Clin. Oncol. 7, 279-283 (2002).
3. Basavanhally, A. et al. Multi-field-of-view strategy for image-based outcome prediction of multi-parametric estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer histopathology: Comparison to Oncotype DX. J. Pathol. Inform. 2, S1 (2011).
4. Paik, S. Development and clinical utility of a 21-gene recurrence score prognostic assay in patients with early breast cancer treated with Tamoxifen. Oncologist 12, 631-635 (2007).
5. Paik, S. et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 3726-3734 (2006).
6. Cronin, M. et al. Analytical validation of the Oncotype DX genomic diagnostic test for recurrence prognosis and therapeutic response prediction in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin. Chem. 53, 1084-1091 (2007).
7. Williams, D. J. et al. Proliferation (Ki-67 and phosphohistone H3) and Oncotype DX recurrence score in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Appl. Immunohistochem. Mol. Morphol. 19, 431-436 (2011).
8. Agner, S. C. et al. Textural kinetics: A novel dynamic contrast-enhancement (DCE)-MRI feature for breast lesion classification. J. Digit. Imaging 24, 446-463 (2011).
9. Ashraf, A. B. et al. Identification of intrinsic imaging phenotypes for breast cancer tumors: Preliminary associations with gene expression profiles. Radiology 272, 374-384 (2014).
10. Nie, K. et al. Quantitative analysis of lesion morphology and texture features for diagnostic prediction in breast MRI. Acad. Radiol. 15, 1513-1525 (2008).
11. Han, M. et al. Prognostic role of MRI enhancement features in patients with breast cancer: value of adjacent vessel sign and increased ipsilateral whole-breast vascularity. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 199, 921-928 (2012).
12. Yamamoto, S. et al. Radiogenomic analysis of breast cancer using MRI: a preliminary study to define the landscape. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 199, 654-663 (2012).
13. Vassiou, K. et al. Morphological and kinetic characteristics of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) correlated with histopathological factors of breast cancer: A potential prognostic role of breat MRI? Eur. J. Radiol. 1, 124-132 (2009).
14. Chang, Y. W. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer and correlation with prognostic factors. Acta. Radiol. 50, 990-998 (2009).
15. Sutton, E. J. et al. Breast cancer subtype intertumor heterogeneity: MRI-based features predict results of a genomic assay. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 42, 1398-1406 (2015).
16. Agner, S. C. et al. Computerized image analysis for identifying triple-negative breast cancers and differentiating them from other molecular subtypes of breast cancer on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: A feasibility study. Radiology 272, 91-99 (2014).
17. Dalal, N. & Triggs, B. Histograms of oriented gradients for human detection. in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on. 886-893 (IEEE).
18. Ojala, T., Pietikäinen, M. & Harwood, D. A comparative study of texture measures with classification based on feature distributions. Patt. Rec. 29, 51-59 (1996).
19. Dalal, N., Triggs, B. & Schmid, C. Human detection using oriented histograms of flow and appearance. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3952, 428-441 (2006).
20. Pietikäinen, M. & Zhao, G. In Advances in Independent Component Analysis and Learing Machines (eds Bingham, E. et al.) Ch. 9, 175-210 (Elsevier, 2015).
21. Gardezi, S. & Faye, I. Fusion of completed local binary pattern features with curvelet features for mammogram classification. Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 9, 3037-3048 (2015).
22. Ergin, S. & Kilinc, O. A new feature extraction framework based on wavelets for breast cancer diagnosis. Comput. Biol. Med. 51, 171-182 (2014).
23. Uematsu, T., Kasami, M. & Yuen, S. Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between M R imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 250, 638-647 (2009).
24. Harris, L. et al. American society of clinical oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 5287-5312 (2007).
25. Chen, W. et al. Automatic identification and classification of characteristic kinetic curves of breast lesions on DCE-MRI. Med. Phys. 33, 2878-2887 (2006).
26. Bhooshan, N. et al. Cancerous breast lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: Computerized characterization for image-based prognostic markers. Radiology 254, 680-690 (2010).
27. Thompson, C. L. & Li, L. Association of sleep duration and breast cancer OncotypeDX recurrence score. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 134, 1291-1295 (2012).
28. Agner, S. C., Xu, J. & Madabhushi, A. Spectral embedding based active contour (SEAC) for lesion segmentation on breast dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Med. Phys. 40, 032305 (2013).
29. Tofts, P. S., Berkowitz, B. & Schnall, M. D. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn. Reson. Med. 33, 564-568 (1995).
30. Sourbron, S. P. & Buckley, D. L. On the scope and interpretation of the Tofts models for DCE-MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 66, 735-745 (2011).
31. Newell, D. et al. Selection of diagnostic features on breast MRI to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions using computer-aided diagnosis: differences in lesions presenting as mass and non-mass-like enhancement. Eur. J. Radiol. 20, 771-781 (2010).
32. Martinez, A. M. & Kak, A. C. PCA versus LDA. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 23, 228-233 (2001).
33. Hupse, R. & Karssemeijer, N. The effect of feature selection methods on computer-aided detection of masses in mammograms. Phys. Med. Biol. 55, 2893-2904 (2010).
34. Parmar, C., Grossmann, P., Bussink, J., Lambin, P. & Aerts, H. J. Machine learning methods for quantitative radiomic biomarkers. Sci. Rep. 5, 13087 (2015).
35. Basavanhally, A., Viswanath, S. & Madabhushi, A. Predicting classifier performance with limited training data: Applications to computer-aided diagnosis in breast and prostate cancer. PLoS ONE 10, e0117900 (2015).