Dataset Information

Volume doubling time and radiomic features predict tumor behavior of screen-detected lung cancers.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Image-based biomarkers could have translational implications by characterizing tumor behavior of lung cancers diagnosed during lung cancer screening. In this study, peritumoral and intratumoral radiomics and volume doubling time (VDT) were used to identify high-risk subsets of lung patients diagnosed in lung cancer screening that are associated with poor survival outcomes.

Methods

Data and images were acquired from the National Lung Screening Trial. VDT was calculated between two consequent screening intervals approximately 1 year apart; peritumoral and intratumoral radiomics were extracted from the baseline screen. Overall survival (OS) was the main endpoint. Classification and Regression Tree analyses identified the most predictive covariates to classify patient outcomes.

Results

Decision tree analysis stratified patients into three risk-groups (low, intermediate, and high) based on VDT and one radiomic feature (compactness). High-risk patients had extremely poor survival outcomes (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.15; 25% 5-year OS) versus low-risk patients (HR = 1.00; 83.3% 5-year OS). Among early-stage lung cancers, high-risk patients had poor survival outcomes (HR = 9.07; 44.4% 5-year OS) versus the low-risk group (HR = 1.00; 90.9% 5-year OS). For VDT, the decision tree analysis identified a novel cut-point of 279 days and using this cut-point VDT alone discriminated between aggressive (HR = 4.18; 45% 5-year OS) versus indolent/low-risk cancers (HR = 1.00; 82.8% 5-year OS).

Conclusion

We utilized peritumoral and intratumoral radiomic features and VDT to generate a model that identify a high-risk group of screen-detected lung cancers associated with poor survival outcomes. These vulnerable subset of screen-detected lung cancers may be candidates for more aggressive surveillance/follow-up and treatment, such as adjuvant therapy.

SUBMITTER: Perez-Morales J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9310661 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the morphology, radiological stage, conspicuity, and computer-assisted detection (CAD) characteristics of colorectal cancers (CRC) detected by computed tomographic colonography (CTC) in screening and symptomatic populations.MethodsTwo radiologists independently analyzed CTC images from 133 patients diagnosed with CRC in (a) two randomized trials of symptomatic patients (35 patients with 36 tumours) and (b) a screening program using fecal occult blood testing (FOBt; 98 patients with 100 tumours), measuring tumour length, volume, morphology, radiological stage, and subjective conspicuity. A commercial CAD package was applied to both datasets. We compared CTC characteristics between screening and symptomatic populations with multivariable regression.ResultsScreen-detected CRC were significantly smaller (mean 3.0 vs 4.3 cm, p?<?0.001), of lower volume (median 9.1 vs 23.2 cm3, p?<?0.001) and more frequently polypoid (34/100, 34 % vs. 5/36, 13.9 %, p?=?0.02) than symptomatic CRC. They were of earlier stage than symptomatic tumours (OR?=?0.17, 95 %CI 0.07-0.41, p?<?0.001), and were judged as significantly less conspicuous (mean conspicuity 54.1/100 vs. 72.8/100, p?<?0.001). CAD detection was significantly lower for screen-detected (77.4 %; 95 %CI 67.9-84.7 %) than symptomatic CRC (96.9 %; 95 %CI 83.8-99.4 %, p?=?0.02).ConclusionsScreen-detected CRC are significantly smaller, more frequently polypoid, subjectively less conspicuous, and less likely to be identified by CAD than those in symptomatic patients.Key points• Screen-detected colorectal cancers (CRC) are significantly smaller than symptomatic CRC. • Screening cases are significantly less conspicuous to radiologists than symptomatic tumours. • Screen-detected CRC have different morphology compared to symptomatic tumours (more polypoid, fewer annular). • A commercial computer-aided detection (CAD) system was significantly less likely to note screen-detected CRC.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Radiomics or computer-extracted texture features derived from MRI have been shown to help quantitatively characterize prostate cancer (PCa). Radiomics have not been explored depth in the context of predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR) of PCa. PURPOSE:To identify a set of radiomic features derived from pretreatment biparametric MRI (bpMRI) that may be predictive of PCa BCR. STUDY TYPE:Retrospective. SUBJECTS:In all, 120 PCa patients from two institutions, I1 and I2 , partitioned into training set D1 (N?=?70) from I1 and independent validation set D2 (N?=?50) from I2 . All patients were followed for ?3 years. SEQUENCE:3T, T2 -weighted (T2 WI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps derived from diffusion-weighted sequences. ASSESSMENT:PCa regions of interest (ROIs) on T2 WI were annotated by two experienced radiologists. Radiomic features from bpMRI (T2 WI and ADC maps) were extracted from the ROIs. A machine-learning classifier (CBCR ) was trained with the best discriminating set of radiomic features to predict BCR (pBCR ). STATISTICAL TESTS:Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with P?<?0.05 were considered statistically significant. Differences in BCR-free survival at 3 years using pBCR was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with Gleason Score (GS), PSA, and PIRADS-v2. RESULTS:Distribution statistics of co-occurrence of local anisotropic gradient orientation (CoLlAGe) and Haralick features from T2 WI and ADC were associated with BCR (P?<?0.05) on D1 . CBCR predictions resulted in a mean AUC?=?0.84 on D1 and AUC?=?0.73 on D2 . A significant difference in BCR-free survival between the predicted classes (BCR?+?and BCR-) was observed (P?=?0.02) on D2 compared to those obtained from GS (P?=?0.8), PSA (P?=?0.93) and PIRADS-v2 (P?=?0.23). DATA CONCLUSION:Radiomic features from pretreatment bpMRI can be predictive of PCa BCR after therapy and may help identify men who would benefit from adjuvant therapy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;48:1626-1636.