Dataset Information

Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors.

ABSTRACT: Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at modeling cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine these radiomic features in patients with multifocal disease. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a need for improving personalized patient-level prognostication to better inform treatment. We compared six mathematical methods of combining radiomic features of 3596 tumors in 831 patients with multiple brain metastases and evaluated the performance of these aggregation methods using three survival models: a standard Cox proportional hazards model, a Cox proportional hazards model with LASSO regression, and a random survival forest. Across all three survival models, the weighted average of the largest three metastases had the highest concordance index (95% confidence interval) of 0.627 (0.595-0.661) for the Cox proportional hazards model, 0.628 (0.591-0.666) for the Cox proportional hazards model with LASSO regression, and 0.652 (0.565-0.727) for the random survival forest model. Radiomic features can be effectively combined to establish patient-level outcomes in patients with multifocal brain metastases. Future studies are needed to confirm that the volume-weighted average of the largest three tumors is an effective method for combining radiomic features across other imaging modalities and disease sites.

SUBMITTER: Chang E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7654896 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors.

Chang Enoch E Joel Marina M Chang Hannah Y HY Du Justin J Khanna Omaditya O Omuro Antonio A Chiang Veronica V Aneja Sanjay S

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences 20201106

<h4>Background</h4>Radiomic feature analysis has been shown to be effective at modeling cancer outcomes. It has not yet been established how to best combine these radiomic features in patients with multifocal disease. As the number of patients with multifocal metastatic cancer continues to rise, there is a need for improving personalized patient-level prognostication to better inform treatment.<h4>Methods</h4>We compared six mathematical methods of combining radiomic features of 3596 tumors in 8 ...[more]

PMID: 33173902

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAutomated ICD coding on medical texts via machine learning has been a hot topic. Related studies from medical field heavily relies on conventional bag-of-words (BoW) as the feature extraction method, and do not commonly use more complicated methods, such as word2vec (W2V) and large pretrained models like BERT. This study aimed at uncovering the most effective feature extraction methods for coding models by comparing BoW, W2V and BERT variants.MethodsWe experimented with a Chinese dataset from Fuwai Hospital, which contains 6947 records and 1532 unique ICD codes, and a public Spanish dataset, which contains 1000 records and 2557 unique ICD codes. We designed coding tasks with different code frequency thresholds (denoted as [Formula: see text]), with a lower threshold indicating a more complex task. Using traditional classifiers, we compared BoW, W2V and BERT variants on accomplishing these coding tasks.ResultsWhen [Formula: see text] was equal to or greater than 140 for Fuwai dataset, and 60 for the Spanish dataset, the BERT variants with the whole network fine-tuned was the best method, leading to a Micro-F1 of 93.9% for Fuwai data when [Formula: see text], and a Micro-F1 of 85.41% for the Spanish dataset when [Formula: see text]. When [Formula: see text] fell below 140 for Fuwai dataset, and 60 for the Spanish dataset, BoW turned out to be the best, leading to a Micro-F1 of 83% for Fuwai dataset when [Formula: see text], and a Micro-F1 of 39.1% for the Spanish dataset when [Formula: see text]. Our experiments also showed that both the BERT variants and BoW possessed good interpretability, which is important for medical applications of coding models.ConclusionsThis study shed light on building promising machine learning models for automated ICD coding by revealing the most effective feature extraction methods. Concretely, our results indicated that fine-tuning the whole network of the BERT variants was the optimal method for tasks covering only frequent codes, especially codes that represented unspecified diseases, while BoW was the best for tasks involving both frequent and infrequent codes. The frequency threshold where the best-performing method varied differed between different datasets due to factors like language and codeset.

Project description:BackgroundMicroarray experiments produce expression measurements in genomic scale. A way to derive functional understanding of the data is to focus on functional sets of genes, such as pathways, instead of individual genes. While a common practice for the pathway-level analysis has been functional enrichment analysis such as over-representation analysis and gene set enrichment analysis, an alternative approach has also been explored. In this approach, gene expression data are first aggregated at pathway level to transform the original data into a compact representation in which each row corresponds to a pathway instead of a gene. Thereafter the pathway expression data can be used for differential expression and classification analyses in pathway space, leveraging existing algorithms usually applied to gene expression data. While several studies have proposed the pathway-level aggregation methods, it remains unclear how they compare with one another, since the evaluations were done to a limited extent. Thus this study presents a comprehensive evaluation of six most prominent aggregation methods.ResultsThe compared methods include five existing methods--mean of all member genes (Mean all), mean of condition-responsive genes (Mean CORGs), analysis of sample set enrichment scores (ASSESS), principal component analysis (PCA), and partial least squares (PLS)--and a variant of an existing method (Mean top 50%, averaging top half of member genes). Comprehensive and stringent benchmarking was performed by collecting seven pairs of related but independent datasets encompassing various phenotypes. Aggregation was done in the space of KEGG pathways. Performance of the methods was assessed by classification accuracy validated both internally and externally, and by examining the correlative extent of pathway signatures between the dataset pairs. The assessment revealed that (i) the best accuracy and correlation were obtained from ASSESS and Mean top 50%, (ii) Mean all showed the lowest accuracy, and (iii) Mean CORGs and PLS gave rise to the largest extent of discordance in the pathway signature correlation.ConclusionsThe two best performing method (ASSESS and Mean top 50%) are suggested to be preferred. The benchmarking analysis also suggests that there is both room and necessity for developing a novel method for pathway-level aggregation.

Project description:MotivationA common experimental output in biomedical science is a list of genes implicated in a given biological process or disease. The gene lists resulting from a group of studies answering the same, or similar, questions can be combined by ranking aggregation methods to find a consensus or a more reliable answer. Evaluating a ranking aggregation method on a specific type of data before using it is required to support the reliability since the property of a dataset can influence the performance of an algorithm. Such evaluation on gene lists is usually based on a simulated database because of the lack of a known truth for real data. However, simulated datasets tend to be too small compared to experimental data and neglect key features, including heterogeneity of quality, relevance and the inclusion of unranked lists.ResultsIn this study, a group of existing methods and their variations that are suitable for meta-analysis of gene lists are compared using simulated and real data. Simulated data were used to explore the performance of the aggregation methods as a function of emulating the common scenarios of real genomic data, with various heterogeneity of quality, noise level and a mix of unranked and ranked data using 20 000 possible entities. In addition to the evaluation with simulated data, a comparison using real genomic data on the SARS-CoV-2 virus, cancer (non-small cell lung cancer) and bacteria (macrophage apoptosis) was performed. We summarize the results of our evaluation in a simple flowchart to select a ranking aggregation method, and in an automated implementation using the meta-analysis by information content algorithm to infer heterogeneity of data quality across input datasets.Availability and implementationThe code for simulated data generation and running edited version of algorithms: https://github.com/baillielab/comparison_of_RA_methods. Code to perform an optimal selection of methods based on the results of this review, using the MAIC algorithm to infer the characteristics of an input dataset, can be downloaded here: https://github.com/baillielab/maic. An online service for running MAIC: https://baillielab.net/maic.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors.

Publications

Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets