MR Imaging-Based Radiomic Signatures of Distinct Molecular Subgroups of Medulloblastoma.
Adolescent
Cerebellar Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Child
Child, Preschool
Cohort Studies
Databases, Factual
Female
Hedgehog Proteins
/ metabolism
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Machine Learning
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ methods
Male
Medulloblastoma
/ diagnostic imaging
Predictive Value of Tests
Prognosis
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Journal
AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology
ISSN: 1936-959X
Titre abrégé: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003708
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2019
01 2019
Historique:
received:
29
06
2018
accepted:
06
10
2018
pubmed:
14
12
2018
medline:
7
1
2020
entrez:
8
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Distinct molecular subgroups of pediatric medulloblastoma confer important differences in prognosis and therapy. Currently, tissue sampling is the only method to obtain information for classification. Our goal was to develop and validate radiomic and machine learning approaches for predicting molecular subgroups of pediatric medulloblastoma. In this multi-institutional retrospective study, we evaluated MR imaging datasets of 109 pediatric patients with medulloblastoma from 3 children's hospitals from January 2001 to January 2014. A computational framework was developed to extract MR imaging-based radiomic features from tumor segmentations, and we tested 2 predictive models: a double 10-fold cross-validation using a combined dataset consisting of all 3 patient cohorts and a 3-dataset cross-validation, in which training was performed on 2 cohorts and testing was performed on the third independent cohort. We used the Wilcoxon rank sum test for feature selection with assessment of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to evaluate model performance. Of 590 MR imaging-derived radiomic features, including intensity-based histograms, tumor edge-sharpness, Gabor features, and local area integral invariant features, extracted from imaging-derived tumor segmentations, tumor edge-sharpness was most useful for predicting sonic hedgehog and group 4 tumors. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed superior performance of the double 10-fold cross-validation model for predicting sonic hedgehog, group 3, and group 4 tumors when using combined T1- and T2-weighted images (area under the curve = 0.79, 0.70, and 0.83, respectively). With the independent 3-dataset cross-validation strategy, select radiomic features were predictive of sonic hedgehog (area under the curve = 0.70-0.73) and group 4 (area under the curve = 0.76-0.80) medulloblastoma. This study provides proof-of-concept results for the application of radiomic and machine learning approaches to a multi-institutional dataset for the prediction of medulloblastoma subgroups.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Distinct molecular subgroups of pediatric medulloblastoma confer important differences in prognosis and therapy. Currently, tissue sampling is the only method to obtain information for classification. Our goal was to develop and validate radiomic and machine learning approaches for predicting molecular subgroups of pediatric medulloblastoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this multi-institutional retrospective study, we evaluated MR imaging datasets of 109 pediatric patients with medulloblastoma from 3 children's hospitals from January 2001 to January 2014. A computational framework was developed to extract MR imaging-based radiomic features from tumor segmentations, and we tested 2 predictive models: a double 10-fold cross-validation using a combined dataset consisting of all 3 patient cohorts and a 3-dataset cross-validation, in which training was performed on 2 cohorts and testing was performed on the third independent cohort. We used the Wilcoxon rank sum test for feature selection with assessment of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to evaluate model performance.
RESULTS
Of 590 MR imaging-derived radiomic features, including intensity-based histograms, tumor edge-sharpness, Gabor features, and local area integral invariant features, extracted from imaging-derived tumor segmentations, tumor edge-sharpness was most useful for predicting sonic hedgehog and group 4 tumors. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed superior performance of the double 10-fold cross-validation model for predicting sonic hedgehog, group 3, and group 4 tumors when using combined T1- and T2-weighted images (area under the curve = 0.79, 0.70, and 0.83, respectively). With the independent 3-dataset cross-validation strategy, select radiomic features were predictive of sonic hedgehog (area under the curve = 0.70-0.73) and group 4 (area under the curve = 0.76-0.80) medulloblastoma.
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides proof-of-concept results for the application of radiomic and machine learning approaches to a multi-institutional dataset for the prediction of medulloblastoma subgroups.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30523141
pii: ajnr.A5899
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5899
pmc: PMC6330121
mid: NIHMS1510042
doi:
Substances chimiques
Hedgehog Proteins
0
SHH protein, human
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
154-161Subventions
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB020527
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R56 EB020527
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2019 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.
Références
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016 Jun;43(6):1269-78
pubmed: 26663695
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Dec;36(12):2386-93
pubmed: 26338912
Transl Cancer Res. 2016 Aug;5(4):432-447
pubmed: 29188191
Neurotherapeutics. 2017 Apr;14(2):265-273
pubmed: 28386677
Biometrics. 1947 Sep;3(3):119-22
pubmed: 18903631
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Apr;200(4):895-903
pubmed: 23521467
Cancer Cell. 2015 May 11;27(5):728-43
pubmed: 25965575
Nat Genet. 2017 May;49(5):780-788
pubmed: 28394352
Neuro Oncol. 2017 Nov 29;19(12):1688-1697
pubmed: 28499022
J Digit Imaging. 2018 Aug;31(4):403-414
pubmed: 28993897
Cancer Cell. 2017 Jun 12;31(6):737-754.e6
pubmed: 28609654
Radiology. 2016 Dec;281(3):907-918
pubmed: 27636026
Nat Rev Neurol. 2011 Jul 26;7(9):495-506
pubmed: 21788981
Radiology. 2014 Oct;273(1):168-74
pubmed: 24827998
Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Jun;131(6):821-31
pubmed: 27040285
Acta Neuropathol. 2012 Apr;123(4):615-26
pubmed: 22057785
Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2018 Jul 30;2018:1729071
pubmed: 30154684
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec;11(12):714-22
pubmed: 25348790
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Apr 10;29(11):1408-14
pubmed: 20823417
Neuro Oncol. 2017 Jan;19(1):128-137
pubmed: 27502248
Radiology. 2014 Jan;270(1):1-2
pubmed: 24056404
Nature. 2017 Jul 19;547(7663):311-317
pubmed: 28726821
Sci Transl Med. 2015 Sep 2;7(303):303ra138
pubmed: 26333934
Acta Neuropathol. 2012 Apr;123(4):473-84
pubmed: 22358457
Acta Neuropathol. 2011 Mar;121(3):381-96
pubmed: 21267586
Acta Neuropathol. 2012 Apr;123(4):465-72
pubmed: 22134537
Hepatology. 2015 Sep;62(3):792-800
pubmed: 25930992
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Feb;39(2):208-216
pubmed: 28982791
J Neurooncol. 2018 Jun;138(2):231-240
pubmed: 29427151
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Jul;46(1):115-123
pubmed: 27678245
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2013 Sep;60(9):1408-10
pubmed: 23512859
Neuro Oncol. 2018 May 18;20(6):848-857
pubmed: 29036412
J Neurooncol. 2017 Nov;135(2):353-360
pubmed: 28808827
J Neurooncol. 2015 May;123(1):65-73
pubmed: 25862008
Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Jun;131(6):803-20
pubmed: 27157931
Nature. 2010 Dec 23;468(7327):1095-9
pubmed: 21150899
Radiology. 2012 Aug;264(2):387-96
pubmed: 22723499
Radiology. 2013 Oct;269(1):8-15
pubmed: 24062559
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 Jul;35(7):1263-9
pubmed: 24831600
Nature. 2012 Aug 2;488(7409):49-56
pubmed: 22832581