Effects of contrast-enhancement, reconstruction slice thickness and convolution kernel on the diagnostic performance of radiomics signature in solitary pulmonary nodule

Scientific Reports

Volumn 6, Issue , 2016, Pages

  He, Lan ^a,b   Huang, Yanqi ^a   Ma, Zelan ^a   Liang, Cuishan ^a   Liang, Changhong ^a   Liu, Zaiyi ^a  

^a GUANGDONG PROVINCIAL PEOPLE'S HOSPITAL   (China)

^b SOUTH CHINA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; LUNG NODULE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; X-RAY TOMOGRAPHY;

ADULT; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY;

EID: 84991690918     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep34921     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alpert, J. B., Lowry, C. M. & Ko, J. P. Imaging the solitary pulmonary nodule. Clin Chest Med. 36, 161-178, vii (2015).
2. Callister, M. E. et al. British Thoracic Society guidelines for the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules. Thorax. 70 Suppl 2, ii1-ii54 (2015).
3. Rena, O. et al. The solitary pulmonary nodule in patients with previous cancer history: results of surgical treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol. 39, 1248-1253 (2013).
4. Jimborean, G., Ianosi, E. S., Comes, A., Budin, C. & Preda, D. Solitary pulmonary nodule: diagnosis criteria and management. Pneumologia. 58, 211-218 (2009).
5. Ost, D. & Fein, A. Evaluation and management of the solitary pulmonary nodule. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 162, 782-787 (2000).
6. Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D. & Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 65, 5-29 (2015).
7. Ferlay, J. et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 127, 2893-2917 (2010).
8. Zheng, B. et al. A Modified Model for Preoperatively Predicting Malignancy of Solitary Pulmonary Nodules: An Asia Cohort Study. Ann Thorac Surg. 100, 288-294 (2015).
9. Ikehara, M. et al. Comparison of thin-section CT and pathological findings in small solid-density type pulmonary adenocarcinoma: prognostic factors from CT findings. Eur J Radiol. 81, 189-194 (2012).
10. Goldin, J. G., Brown, M. S. & Petkovska, I. Computer-aided diagnosis in lung nodule assessment. Journal of thoracic imaging. 23, 97-104 (2008).
11. Kim, S. K. et al. Accuracy of PET/CT in characterization of solitary pulmonary lesions. J Nucl Med. 48, 214-220 (2007).
12. Paslawski, M., Krzyzanowski, K., Zlomaniec, J. & Gwizdak, J. Morphological characteristics of malignant solitary pulmonary nodules. Ann Univ Mariae Curie Sklodowska Med. 59, 6-13 (2004).
13. Gillies, R. J., Kinahan, P. E. & Hricak, H. Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data. Radiology 278, 563-577 (2016).
14. Aerts, H. J. et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nature communications 5, 4006 (2014).
15. Kuo, M. D. & Jamshidi, N. Behind the numbers: Decoding molecular phenotypes with radiogenomics-guiding principles and technical considerations. Radiology 270, 320-325 (2014).
16. Lambin, P. et al. Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. European journal of cancer 48, 441-446 (2012).
17. Andersen, M. B. et al. CT texture analysis can help differentiate between malignant and benign lymph nodes in the mediastinum in patients suspected for lung cancer. Acta Radiol. 0(0), 1-8 (2015).
18. Bayanati, H. et al. Quantitative CT texture and shape analysis: can it differentiate benign and malignant mediastinal lymph nodes in patients with primary lung cancer? Eur Radiol. 25, 480-487 (2015).
19. Mackin, D. et al. Measuring Computed Tomography Scanner Variability of Radiomics Features. Invest Radiol. 50, 757-765 (2015).
20. Nguyen, P. et al. Optical differentiation between malignant and benign lymphadenopathy by grey scale texture analysis of endobronchial ultrasound convex probe images. Chest. 141, 709-715 (2012).
21. Wang, J. J. et al. Prediction models for solitary pulmonary nodules based on curvelet textural features and clinical parameters. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 14, 6019-6023 (2013).
22. Parmar, C. et al. Radiomic feature clusters and prognostic signatures specific for Lung and Head & Neck cancer. Sci Rep. 5, 11044 (2015).
23. Leijenaar, R. T. et al. External validation of a prognostic CT-based radiomic signature in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Acta Oncol. 54, 1423-1429 (2015).
24. Kumar, V. et al. Radiomics: the process and the challenges. Magn Reson Imaging. 30, 1234-1248 (2012).
25. Shrout, P. E. & Fleiss, J. L. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 86, 420-428 (1979).
26. Friedman, J., Hastie, T. & Tibshirani, R. Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent. J Stat Softw. 33, 1-22 (2010).
27. DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M. & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 44, 837-845 (1988).
28. Pencina, M. J., D'Agostino, R. B. Sr., D'Agostino, R. B. Jr. & Vasan, R. S. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 27, 157-172; discussion 207-112 (2008).
29. Pencina, M. J., DAgostino, R. B. Sr. & Steyerberg, E. W. Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers. Stat Med. 30, 11-21 (2011).
30. Leening, M. J., Vedder, M. M., Witteman, J. C., Pencina, M. J. & Steyerberg, E. W. Net reclassification improvement: computation, interpretation, and controversies: a literature review and clinicians guide. Ann Intern Med. 160, 122-131 (2014).
31. Parmar, C. et al. Robust Radiomics feature quantification using semiautomatic volumetric segmentation. Plos One. 9, e102107 (2014).
32. Leijenaar, R. T. et al. Stability of FDG-PET Radiomics features: an integrated analysis of test-retest and inter-observer variability. Acta Oncol. 52, 1391-1397 (2013).
33. Hunter, L. A. et al. High quality machine-robust image features: identification in nonsmall cell lung cancer computed tomography images. Med Phys. 40, 121916 (2013).
34. Ganeshan, B. & Miles, K. A. Quantifying tumour heterogeneity with CT. Cancer Imaging. 13, 140-149 (2013).
35. Ganeshan, B., Miles, K. A., Young, R. C. & Chatwin, C. R. Texture analysis in non-contrast enhanced CT: impact of malignancy on texture in apparently disease-free areas of the liver. Eur J Radiol. 70, 101-110 (2009).
36. Goh, V. et al. Assessment of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic renal cell cancer: CT texture as a predictive biomarker. Radiology. 261, 165-171 (2011).
37. Zhao, B., Tan, Y., Tsai, W. Y., Schwartz, L. H. & Lu, L. Exploring Variability in CT Characterization of Tumors: A Preliminary Phantom Study. Transl Oncol. 7, 88-93 (2014).
38. Tan, Y. et al. Assessing the effect of CT slice interval on unidimensional, bidimensional and volumetric measurements of solid tumours. Cancer Imaging. 12, 497-505 (2012).
39. Weiss, K. L. et al. Hybrid convolution kernel: optimized CT of the head, neck, and spine. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 196, 403-406 (2011).
40. Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G. & Moons, K. G. Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. Ann Intern Med. 162, 55-63 (2015).