Texture analysis of medical images for radiotherapy applications

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 90, Issue 1070, 2017, Pages

  Scalco, Elisa ^a   Rizzo, Giovanna ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF MOLECULAR BIOIMAGING AND PHYSIOLOGY   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOSIMETRY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIOTHERAPY; REVIEW; TREATMENT RESPONSE; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; NEOPLASMS; ORGANS AT RISK; PATHOLOGY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY-COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEOPLASMS; ORGANS AT RISK; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 85011664830     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: 1748880X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20160642     Document Type: Review

References (109)

1. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology 2016; 278: 578-84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015151169
2. Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, Carvalho S, van Stiphout RG, Granton P, et al. Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer 2012; 48: 441-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ejca.2011.11.036
3. Davnall F, Yip CS, Ljungqvist G, Selmi M, Ng F, Sanghera B, et al. Assessment of tumor heterogeneity: an emerging imaging tool for clinical practice? Insights Imaging 2012; 3: 573-89. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s13244-012-0196-6
4. Aerts HJ, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RT, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Cavalho S, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun 2014; 5: 4006. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5006
5. Alobaidli S, McQuaid S, South C, Prakash V, Evans P, Nisbet A. The role of texture analysis in imaging as an outcome predictor and potential tool in radiotherapy treatment planning. Br J Radiol 2014; 87: 5-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20140369
6. Mattonen SA, Ward AD, Palma DA. Pulmonary imaging after stereotactic radiotherapy-does RECIST still apply? Br J Radiol 2016; 89: 20160113. doi: https://doi. org/10.1259/bjr.20160113
7. Lu W, Wang J, Zhang HH. Computerized PET/CT image analysis in the evaluation of tumour response to therapy. Br J Radiol 2015; 88: 20140625. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1259/bjr.20140625
8. Chicklore S, Goh V, Siddique M, Roy A, Marsden PK, Cook GJ. Quantifying tumour heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging by texture analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40: 133-40. doi: https://doi. org/10.1007/s00259-012-2247-0
9. Hatt M, Tixier F, Pierce L, Kinahan PE, Le Rest CC, Visvikis D. Characterization of PET/CT images using texture analysis: the past, the present? any future? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44: 151-165.
10. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I. Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 1973; 3: 610-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ tsmc.1973.4309314
11. Haralick RM. Statistical and structural approach to texture. Proc IEEE 1979; 67: 786-804. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ PROC.1979.11328
12. Galloway MM. Texture analysis using gray level run lengths. Comput Graph Image Process 1975; 4: 172-9. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0146-664x(75)80008-6
13. Tang X. Texture information in run-length matrices. IEEE Trans Image Process 1998; 7: 1602-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ 83.725367
14. Sun C, Wee WG. Neighboring gray level dependence matrix for texture classification. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press; 1983.
15. Russell DA, Hanson JD, Ott E. Dimension of strange attractors. Phys Rev Lett 1980; 45: 1175-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1103/ physrevlett.45.1175
16. Buczkowski S, Kyriacos S, Nekka F, Lo C. The modified box-counting method: analysis of some characteristic parameters. Pattern Recognit 1998; 31: 411-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-3203(97) 00054-X
17. Chen WS, Yuan SY, Hsieh CM. Two algorithms to estimate fractal dimension of gray-level images. Opt Eng 2003; 42: 2452. doi: https://doi.org/10.1117/1.1585061
18. Sarkar N, Chaudhuri BB. An efficient differential box-counting approach to compute fractal dimension of image. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 1994; 24: 115-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/21.259692
19. Li J, Du Q, Sun C. An improved boxcounting method for image fractal dimension estimation. Pattern Recognit 2009; 42: 2460-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. patcog.2009.03.001
20. Chaudhuri BB, Sarkar N. Texture segmentation using fractal dimension. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 1995; 17: 72-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ 34.368149
21. Pentland AP. Fractal-based description of natural scenes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 1984; 6: 661-74. doi: https://doi. org/10.1109/tpami.1984.4767591
22. Soille P, Rivest JF. On the validity of fractal dimension measurements in image analysis. J Vis Commun Image Represent 1996; 7: 217-29. doi: https://doi.org/10.1006/ jvci.1996.0020
23. Veenland JF, Grashius JL, van der Meer F, Beckers AL, Gelsema ES. Estimation of fractal dimension in radiographs. Med Phys 1996; 23: 585-94. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1118/1.597816
24. Depeursinge A, Foncubierta-Rodriguez A, van de Ville D, Müller H. Threedimensional solid texture analysis in biomedical imaging: review and opportunities. Med Image Anal 2014; 18: 176-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2013.10.005
25. Yip SS, Aerts HJ. Applications and limitations of radiomics. Phys Med Biol 2016; 61: R150-66. doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/61/13/R150
26. Orlhac F, Soussan M, Maisonobe JA, Garcia CA, Vanderlinden B, Buvat I. Tumor texture analysis in 18F-FDG PET: relationships between texture parameters, histogram indices, standardized uptake values, metabolic volumes, and total lesion glycolysis. J Nucl Med 2014; 55: 414-22. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.2967/jnumed.113.129858
27. Hatt M, Majdoub M, Vallières M, Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Groheux D, et al. 18F-FDG PET uptake characterization through texture analysis: investigating the complementary nature of heterogeneity and functional tumor volume in a multi-cancer site patient cohort. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 38-44. doi: https://doi.org/10.2967/ jnumed.114.144055
28. Vallières M, Freeman CR, Skamene SR, El Naqa I. A radiomics model from joint FDGPET and MRI texture features for the prediction of lung metastases in soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremities. Phys Med Biol 2015; 60: 5471-96.
29. Nailon WH, Redpath AT, McLaren DB. Characterisation of radiotherapy planning volumes using textural analysis. Acta Oncol 2008; 47: 1303-8. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1080/02841860802256467
30. Khalvati F, Wong A, Haider MA. Automated prostate cancer detection via comprehensive multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging texture feature models. BMC Med Imaging 2015; 15: 27. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s12880-015-0069-9
31. Brown AM, Nagala S, Mclean MA, Lu Y, Scoffings D, Apte A, et al. Multiinstitutional validation of a novel textural analysis tool for preoperative stratification of suspected thyroid tumors on diffusionweighted MRI. Magn Reson Med 2016; 75: 1708-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ mrm.25743
32. Vignati A, Mazzetti S, Giannini V, Russo F, Bollito E, Porpiglia F, et al. Texture features on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: new potential biomarkers for prostate cancer aggressiveness. Phys Med Biol 2015; 60: 2685-701.
33. Park SY, Park JM, Sung W, Kim IH, Ye SJ. Texture analysis on the edge-enhanced fluence of VMAT. Radiat Oncol 2015; 10: 74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-015-0382-z
34. Nyflot MJ, Yang F, Byrd D, Bowen SR, Sandison GA, Kinahan PE. Quantitative radiomics: impact of stochastic effects on textural feature analysis implies the need for standards. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2015; 2: 041002. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1117/1.JMI.2.4.041002
35. Balagurunathan Y, Gu Y, Wang H, Kumar V, Grove O, Hawkins S, et al. Reproducibility and prognosis of quantitative features extracted from CT images. Transl Oncol 2014; 7: 72-87. doi: https://doi.org/10.1593/ tlo.13844
36. Parmar C, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar R, Jermoumi M, Carvalho S, Mak RH, et al. Robust radiomics feature quantification using semiautomatic volumetric segmentation. PLoS One 2014; 9: 1-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0102107
37. Yip SS, Coroller TP, Sanford NN, Huynh E, Mamon H, Aerts HJ, et al. Use of registration-based contour propagation in texture analysis for esophageal cancer pathologic response prediction. Phys Med Biol 2016; 61: 906-22. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1088/0031-9155/61/2/906
38. Cunliffe AR, Al-Hallaq HA, Labby ZE, Pelizzari CA, Straus C, Sensakovic WF, et al. Lung texture in serial thoracic CT scans: assessment of change introduced by image registration. Med Phys 2012; 39: 4679. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4730505
39. Cunliffe AR, Armato SG, Fei XM, Tuohy RE, Al-Hallaq HA. Lung texture in serial thoracic CT scans: registration-based methods to compare anatomically matched regions. Med Phys 2013; 40: 61906. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4805110
40. Moriconi S, Scalco E, Rancati T, Messina A, Giandini T, Valdagni R, et al. Application and evaluation of wavelet-based surface reconstruction for contour propagation in radiotherapy. In: Proceedings of MICCAI workshop on imaging and computer assistance in radiation therapy (ICART). Munich, Germany; 2015. pp. 58-65.
41. Leijenaar RT, Carvalho S, Hoebers FJ, Aerts HJ, van Elmpt WJ, Huang SH, et al. External validation of a prognostic CTbased radiomic signature in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Acta Oncol 2015; 54: 1423-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/ 0284186X.2015.1061214
42. Meyer E, Raupach R, Lell MM, Schmidt B, Kachelrieb M. Normalized metal artifact reduction (NMAR) in computed tomography. Med Phys 2010; 37: 5482-93. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3484090
43. Veenland JF, Grashuis JL, Gelsema ES. Texture analysis in radiographs: the influence of modulation transfer function and noise on the discriminative ability of texture features. Med Phys 1998; 25: 922-36. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598271
44. Kim H, Park CM, Lee M, Park SJ, Song YS, Lee JH, et al. Impact of reconstruction algorithms on CT radiomic features of pulmonary tumors: analysis of intra-and inter-reader variability and interreconstruction algorithm variability. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0164924.
45. Yang J, Zhang L, Fave XJ, Fried DV, Stingo FC, Ng CS, et al. Uncertainty analysis of quantitative imaging features extracted from contrast-enhanced CT in lung tumors. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2016; 48: 1-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compmedimag.2015.12.001
46. He L, Huang Y, Ma Z, Liang C, Liang C, Liu Z. Effects of contrast-enhancement, reconstruction slice thickness and convolution kernel on the diagnostic performance of radiomics signature in solitary pulmonary nodule. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 34921. doi: https:// doi.org/10.1038/srep34921
47. Galavis PE, Hollensen C, Jallow N, Paliwal B, Jeraj R. Variability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters. Acta Oncol 2010; 49: 1012-16. doi: https:// doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2010.498437
48. Yan J, Chu-Shern JL, Loi HY, Khor LK, Sinha AK, Quek ST, et al. Impact of image reconstruction settings on texture features in 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 1667-73. doi: https://doi.org/10.2967/ jnumed.115.156927
49. Lasnon C, Majdoub M, Lavigne B, Do P. 18F-FDG PET/CT heterogeneity quantification through textural features in the era of harmonisation programs: a focus on lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43: 2324-35.
50. van Velden FH, Kramer GM, Frings V, Nissen IA, Mulder ER, de Langen AJ, et al. Repeatability of radiomic features in nonsmall-cell lung cancer [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT studies: impact of reconstruction and delineation. Mol Imaging Biol 2016; 18: 788-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11307-016-0940-2
51. Doumou G, Siddique M, Tsoumpas C, Goh V, Cook GJ. The precision of textural analysis in 18F-FDG-PET scans of oesophageal cancer. Eur Radiol 2015; 25: 2805-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00330-015-3681-8
52. Lu L, Lv W, Jiang J, Ma J, Feng Q, Rahmim A, et al. Robustness of radiomic features in (11C)Choline and (18F)FDG PET/CT imaging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: impact of segmentation and discretization. Mol Imaging Biol 2016; 18: 935-45.
53. Desseroit MC, Tixier F, Weber W, Siegel BA, Le Rest CC, Visvikis D, et al. Reliability of PET/CT shape and heterogeneity features in functional and morphological components of non-small cell lung cancer tumors: a repeatability analysis in a prospective multi-center cohort. J Nucl Med 2016; jnumed.116.180919 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.2967/jnumed.116.180919
54. Leijenaar RT, Nalbantov G, Carvalho S, van Elmpt WJ, Troost EG, Boellaard R, et al. The effect of SUV discretization in quantitative FDG-PET radiomics: the need for standardized methodology in tumor texture analysis. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 11075. doi: https:// doi.org/10.1038/srep11075
55. Hatt M, Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Pradier O, Visvikis D. Robustness of intratumour 18F-FDG PET uptake heterogeneity quantification for therapy response prediction in oesophageal carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40: 1662-71. doi: https://doi. org/10.1007/s00259-013-2486-8
56. Cheng NM, Fang YH, Tsan DL, Hsu CH, Yen TC. Respiration-averaged CT for attenuation correction of PET images-impact on PET texture features in non-small cell lung cancer patients. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0150509. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0150509
57. Grootjans W, Tixier F, van der Vos CS, Vriens D, Le Rest CC, Bussink J, et al. The impact of optimal respiratory gating and image noise on evaluation of intra-tumor heterogeneity in 18F-FDG positron emission tomography imaging of lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2016; 57: 1692-8. doi: https://doi. org/10.2967/jnumed.116.173112
58. Orlhac F, Nioche C, Soussan M, Buvat I. Understanding changes in tumor textural indices in PET: a comparison between visual assessment and index values in simulated and patient data. J Nucl Med 2016; jnumed.116.181859 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: https://doi.org/10.2967/ jnumed.116.181859
59. Mayerhoefer ME, Szomolanyi P, Jirak D, Materka A, Trattnig S. Effects of MRI acquisition parameter variations and protocol heterogeneity on the results of texture analysis and pattern discrimination: an application-oriented study. Med Phys 2009; 36: 1236. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/ 1.3081408
60. Tustison NJ, Avants BB, Cook PA, Zheng Y, Egan A, Yushkevich PA, et al. N4ITK: Improved N3 Bias Correction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010 29: 1310-20.
61. Giannini V, Mazzetti S, Vignati A, Russo F, Bollito E, Porpiglia F, et al. A fully automatic computer aided diagnosis system for peripheral zone prostate cancer detection using multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2015; 46: 219-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compmedimag.2015.09.001
62. Lemaitre G, Martì R, Freixenet J, Vilanova JC, Walker PM, Meriaudeau F. Computeraided detection and diagnosis for prostate cancer based on mono and multiparametric MRI: a review. Comput Biol Med 2015; 60: 8-31. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.compbiomed.2015.02.009
63. Jansen JF, Lu Y, Gupta G, Lee NY, Stambuk HE, Mazaheri Y, et al. Texture analysis on parametric maps derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in head and neck cancer. World J Radiol 2016; 8: 90-7. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.4329/wjr.v8.i1.90
64. Song YS, Park CM, Lee SM, Park SJ, Cho HR, Choi SH, et al. Reproducibility of histogram and texture parameters derived from intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MRI of FN13762 rat breast carcinomas. Anticancer Res 2014; 34: 2135-44.
65. Brynolfsson P, Nilsson D, Henriksson R, Hauksson J, Karlsson M, Garpebring A, et al. ADC texture-an imaging biomarker for high-grade glioma? Med Phys 2014; 41: 101903. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/ 1.4894812
66. Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Grenier P, Cabanis E, Laval-Jeantet M. MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 1986; 161: 401-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/ radiology.161.2.3763909
67. Andreou A, Koh DM, Collins DJ, Blackledge M, Wallace T, Leach MO, et al. Measurement reproducibility of perfusion fraction and pseudodiffusion coefficient derived by intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MR imaging in normal liver and metastases. Eur Radiol 2013; 23: 428-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00330-012-2604-1
68. Raja JV, Khan M, Ramachandra VK, Al-Kadi O. Texture analysis of CT images in the characterization of oral cancers involving buccal mucosa. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41: 475-80. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1259/dmfr/83345935
69. Alvarenga AV, Infantosi AF, Pereira WC, Azevedo CM. Assessing the combined performance of texture and morphological parameters in distinguishing breast tumors in ultrasound images. Med Phys 2012; 39: 7350-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/ 1.4766268
70. Fehr D, Veeraraghavan H, Wibmer A, Gondo T, Matsumoto K, Vargas HA, et al. Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2015; 112: E6265-73. doi: https://doi. org/10.1073/pnas.1505935112
71. Al-Kadi OS, Watson D. Texture analysis of aggressive and nonaggressive lung tumor CE CT images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2008; 55: 1822-30. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1109/TBME.2008.919735
72. Yu H, Caldwell C, Mah K, Mozeg D. Coregistered FDG PET/CT-based textural characterization of head and neck cancer for radiation treatment planning. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2009; 28: 374-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2008.2004425
73. Yu H, Caldwell C, Mah K, Poon I, Balogh J, MacKenzie R, et al. Automated radiation targeting in head-and-neck cancer using region-based texture analysis of PET and CT images. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 75: 618-25. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.04.043
74. Wong AJ, Kanwar A, Mohamed AS, Fuller CD. Radiomics in head and neck cancer: from exploration to application. Transl Cancer Res 2016; 5: 371-82. doi: https://doi. org/10.21037/tcr.2016.07.18
75. Scrivener M, De Jong EE, van Timmeren JE, Pieters T, Geets X. Radiomics applied to lung cancer: a review. Transl Cancer Res 2016; 5: 398-409. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.21037/tcr.2016.06.18
76. De Ruysscher D, Sharifi H, Defraene G, Kerns SL, Christiaens M, De Ruyck K, et al. Quantification of radiation-induced lung damage with CT scans: the possible benefit for radiogenomics. Acta Oncol 2013; 52: 1405-10. doi: https://doi.org/10.3109/ 0284186X.2013.813074
77. Palma DA, van Sörnsen de Koste J, Verbakel WF, Vincent A, Senan S. Lung density changes after stereotactic radiotherapy: a quantitative analysis in 50 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol 2011; 81: 974-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijrobp.2010.07.025
78. Defraene G, van Elmpt W, Crijns W, Slagmolen P, De Ruysscher D. CTcharacteristics allow identification of patient-specific susceptibility for radiationinduced lung damage. Radiother Oncol 2015; 117: 29-35. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.07.033
79. Mattonen SA, Palma DA, Haasbeek CJ, Senan S, Ward AD. Early prediction of tumor recurrence based on CT texture changes after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for lung cancer. Med Phys 2014; 41: 33502. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1118/1.4866219
80. Mattonen SA, Palma DA, Haasbeek CJ, Senan S, Ward AD. Texture analysis of automatic graph cuts segmentations for detection of lung cancer recurrence after stereotactic radiotherapy. SPIE Med Imaging 2015; 94: 941719.
81. Mattonen SA, Palma DA, Johnson C, Louie AV, Landis M, Rodrigues G, et al. Detection of local cancer recurrence after stereotactic ablative radiation therapy for lung cancer: physician performance versus radiomic assessment. Int J Radiat Oncol 2016; 94: 1121-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijrobp.2015.12.369
82. Pyka T, Bundschuh RA, Andratschke N, Mayer B, Specht HM, Papp L, et al. Textural features in pre-treatment (F18)-FDG-PET/ CT are correlated with risk of local recurrence and disease-specific survival in early stage NSCLC patients receiving primary stereotactic radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol 2015; 10: 1-9. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s13014-015-0407-7
83. Cook GJ, Yip C, Siddique M, Goh V, Chicklore S, Roy A, et al. Are pretreatment 18F-FDG PET tumor textural features in non-small cell lung cancer associated with response and survival after chemoradiotherapy? J Nucl Med 2013; 54: 19-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.107375
84. Coroller TP, Agrawal V, Narayan V, Hou Y, Grossmann P, Lee SW, et al. Radiomic phenotype features predict pathological response in non-small cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2016; 119: 480-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. radonc.2016.04.004
85. Huynh E, Coroller TP, Narayan V, Agrawal V, Hou Y, Romano J, et al. CT-based radiomic analysis of stereotactic body radiation therapy patients with lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2016; 120: 258-66. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. radonc.2016.05.024
86. 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. doi: https://doi. org/10.2967/jnumed.110.082404
87. Nakajo M, Jinguji M, Nakabeppu Y, Nakajo M, Higashi R, Fukukura Y, et al. Texture analysis of 18F-FDG PET/CT to predict tumour response and prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer treated by chemoradiotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; [Epub ahead of print]. doi: https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3506-2
88. Yip C, Landau D, Kozarski R, Ganeshan B, Thomas R, Michaelidou A, et al. Primary esophageal cancer: heterogeneity as potential prognostic biomarker in patients treated with definitive chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Radiology 2014; 270: 141-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13122869
89. El Naqa I, Grigsby P, Apte A, Kidd E, Donnelly E, Khullar D, et al. Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes. Pattern Recognit 2009; 42: 1162-71. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. patcog.2008.08.011
90. Liu J, Mao Y, Li Z, Zhang D, Zhang Z, Hao S, et al. Use of texture analysis based on contrast-enhanced MRI to predict treatment response to chemoradiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016; 44: 445-55. doi: https://doi. org/10.1002/jmri.25156
91. Scalco E, Marzi S, Sanguineti G, Vidiri A, Rizzo G. Characterization of cervical lymph-nodes using a multi-parametric and multi-modal approach for an early prediction of tumor response to chemoradiotherapy. Phys Med 2016; [Epub ahead of print]. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ejmp.2016.09.003
92. Alic L, van Vliet M, van Dijke CF, Eggermont MM, Veenland JF, Niessen WJ. Heterogeneity in DCE-MRI parametric maps: a biomarker for treatment response? Phys Med Biol 2011; 56: 1601-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/56/6/006
93. OConnor JP, Rose CJ, Jackson A, Watson Y, Cheung S, Maders F, et al. DCE-MRI biomarkers of tumour heterogeneity predict CRC liver metastasis shrinkage following bevacizumab and FOLFOX-6. Br J Cancer 2011; 105: 139-45.
94. Gnep K, Fargeas A, Gutiérrez-Carvajal RE, Commandeur F, Mathieu R, Ospina JD, et al. Haralick textural features on T2-weighted MRI are associated with biochemical recurrence following radiotherapy for peripheral zone prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016; [Epub ahead of print]. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1002/jmri.25335
95. Bundschuh RA, Dinges J, Neumann L, Seyfried M, Zsótér N, Papp L, et al. Textural parameters of tumor heterogeneity in 18FFDG PET/CT for therapy response assessment and prognosis in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. J Nucl Med 2014; 55: 891-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.2967/ jnumed.113.127340
96. De Cecco CN, Ganeshan B, Ciolina M, Rengo M, Meinel FG, Musio D, et al. Texture analysis as imaging biomarker of tumoral response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer patients studied with 3-T magnetic resonance. Invest Radiol 2015; 50: 239-45. doi: https://doi. org/10.1097/rli.0000000000000116
97. Nie K, Shi L, Chen Q, Hu X, Jabbour S, Yue N, et al. Rectal cancer: assessment of neoadjuvant chemo-radiation outcome based on radiomics of multi-parametric MRI. Clin Cancer Res 2016; 22: 5256-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432. CCR-15-2997
98. Tian F, Hayano K, Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV. Response assessment to neoadjuvant therapy in soft tissue sarcomas: using CT texture analysis in comparison to tumor size, density, and perfusion. Abdom Imaging 2015; 40: 1705-12. doi: https://doi. org/10.1007/s00261-014-0318-3
99. Nardone V, Tini P, Biondi M, Sebaste L, Vanzi E, De Otto G, et al. Prognostic value of MR imaging texture analysis in brain non-small cell lung cancer oligo-metastases undergoing stereotactic irradiation. Cureus 2016; 8: e584. doi: https://doi.org/10.7759/ cureus.584
100. Cunliffe A, Armato SG, Castillo R, Pham N, Guerrero T, Al-Hallaq HA. Lung texture in serial thoracic computed tomography scans: correlation of radiomics-based features with radiation therapy dose and radiation pneumonitis development. Int J Radiat Oncol 2015; 91: 1048-56. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.11.030
101. Yang X, Tridandapani S, Beitler JJ, Yu DS, Yoshida EJ, Curran WJ, et al. Ultrasound GLCM texture analysis of radiation-induced parotid-gland injury in head-and-neck cancer radiotherapy: an in vivo study of late toxicity. Med Phys 2012; 39: 5732. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4747526
102. Scalco E, Fiorino C, Cattaneo GM, Sanguineti G, Rizzo G. Texture analysis for the assessment of structural changes in parotid glands induced by radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2013; 109: 384-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2013.09.019
103. Pota M, Scalco E, Sanguineti G, Cattaneo GM, Esposito M, Rizzo G. Early classification of parotid glands shrinkage in radiotherapy patients: a comparative study. Biosyst Eng 2015; 138: 77-89. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biosystemseng.2015.06.007
104. Scalco E, Moriconi S, Rizzo G. Texture analysis to assess structural modifications induced by radiotherapy. In: Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS 2015: 5219-22.
105. Chalkidou A, ODoherty MJ, Marsden PK. False discovery rates in PET and CT studies with texture features: a systematic review. PLoS One 2015; 10: 1-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0124165
106. Parmar C, Grossmann P, Bussink J, Lambin P, Aerts HJ, Doroshow J, et al. Machine learning methods for quantitative radiomic biomarkers. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 649. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13087
107. Huang YQ, Liang CH, He L, Tian J, Liang CS, Chen X, et al. Development and validation of a radiomics nomogram for preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 2157-64. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.9128
108. Wan T, Bloch BN, Plecha D, Thompson CL, Gilmore H, Jaffe C, et al. A radio-genomics approach for identifying high risk estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers on DCE-MRI: preliminary results in predicting OncotypeDX risk scores. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 21394. doi: https:// doi.org/10.1038/srep21394
109. Tixier F, Hatt M, Le Rest CC, Simon B, Key S, Corcos L, et al. Signaling pathways alteration involved in head and neck cancer can be identified through textural features analysis in 18F-FDG PET images: a prospective study. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 449.