Multi-parametric and multi-regional histogram analysis of MRI: modality integration reveals imaging phenotypes of glioblastoma.
Brain
/ diagnostic imaging
Brain Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Cluster Analysis
Contrast Media
Female
Glioblastoma
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Image Enhancement
/ methods
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ methods
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
/ methods
Male
Middle Aged
Phenotype
Proportional Hazards Models
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Glioblastoma
Machine learning
Magnetic resonance imaging
Prognosis
Survival analysis
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
received:
02
11
2018
accepted:
18
12
2018
pubmed:
2
2
2019
medline:
18
12
2019
entrez:
2
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Integrating multiple imaging modalities is crucial for MRI data interpretation. The purpose of this study is to determine whether a previously proposed multi-view approach can effectively integrate the histogram features from multi-parametric MRI and whether the selected features can offer incremental prognostic values over clinical variables. Eighty newly-diagnosed glioblastoma patients underwent surgery and chemoradiotherapy. Histogram features of diffusion and perfusion imaging were extracted from contrast-enhancing (CE) and non-enhancing (NE) regions independently. An unsupervised patient clustering was performed by the multi-view approach. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relevance of patient clustering to survival. The metabolic signatures of patient clusters were compared using multi-voxel spectroscopy analysis. The prognostic values of histogram features were evaluated by survival and ROC curve analyses. Two patient clusters were generated, consisting of 53 and 27 patients respectively. Cluster 2 demonstrated better overall survival (OS) (p = 0.007) and progression-free survival (PFS) (p < 0.001) than Cluster 1. Cluster 2 displayed lower N-acetylaspartate/creatine ratio in NE region (p = 0.040). A higher mean value of anisotropic diffusion in NE region was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.40, p = 0.020) and PFS (HR = 1.36, p = 0.031). The seven features selected by this approach showed significantly incremental value in predicting 12-month OS (p = 0.020) and PFS (p = 0.022). The multi-view clustering method can provide an effective integration of multi-parametric MRI. The histogram features selected may be used as potential prognostic markers. • Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging captures multi-faceted tumor physiology. • Contrast-enhancing and non-enhancing tumor regions represent different tumor components with distinct clinical relevance. • Multi-view data analysis offers a method which can effectively select and integrate multi-parametric and multi-regional imaging features.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30707277
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5984-z
pii: 10.1007/s00330-018-5984-z
pmc: PMC6682853
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4718-4729Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : NIHR/CS/009/011
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
ID : C14303/A17197 and A19274
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : National Institute for Health Research
ID : NIHR/CS/009/011)
Références
Neuroimage. 2002 Oct;17(2):825-41
pubmed: 12377157
Magn Reson Med. 2003 Feb;49(2):223-32
pubmed: 12541241
Magn Reson Med. 2003 Nov;50(5):1077-88
pubmed: 14587019
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004 Mar;25(3):356-69
pubmed: 15037456
Neuroimage. 2004;23 Suppl 1:S208-19
pubmed: 15501092
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005 Jun-Jul;26(6):1446-54
pubmed: 15956514
Br J Radiol. 2006 Feb;79(938):101-9
pubmed: 16489190
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006 Oct;27(9):1969-74
pubmed: 17032877
Eur Radiol. 2007 Jul;17(7):1675-84
pubmed: 17219140
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 10;28(11):1963-72
pubmed: 20231676
Radiology. 2010 Aug;256(2):348-64
pubmed: 20656830
Neuroradiology. 2011 Jul;53(7):483-91
pubmed: 20857285
Neurosurgery. 2012 Jan;70(1):234-43; discussion 243-4
pubmed: 21593697
Lancet. 2012 May 26;379(9830):1984-96
pubmed: 22510398
Magn Reson Imaging. 2012 Nov;30(9):1323-41
pubmed: 22770690
Br J Neurosurg. 2013 Aug;27(4):436-41
pubmed: 23445331
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 Jun;35(6):1096-102
pubmed: 24457819
Nat Commun. 2014 Jun 03;5:4006
pubmed: 24892406
BMC Genet. 2014 Jun 17;15:73
pubmed: 24938865
Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Jan 15;21(2):249-57
pubmed: 25421725
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Jul;36(7):1247-52
pubmed: 25836728
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016 Feb;43(2):487-94
pubmed: 26140696
Sci Rep. 2015 Aug 17;5:13087
pubmed: 26278466
BMC Bioinformatics. 2015 Aug 19;16:261
pubmed: 26283178
Sci Transl Med. 2015 Sep 2;7(303):303ra138
pubmed: 26333934
J Neurosurg. 2017 Jan;126(1):234-241
pubmed: 27058207
Radiology. 2016 Oct;281(1):175-84
pubmed: 27120357
Eur J Radiol. 2016 Jun;85(6):1147-56
pubmed: 27161065
Neuro Oncol. 2016 Dec;18(12):1673-1679
pubmed: 27298312
Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Mar;24(3):794-800
pubmed: 27766560
Br J Radiol. 2017 Feb;90(1070):20160665
pubmed: 27936886
Neuroinformatics. 2017 Apr;15(2):199-213
pubmed: 28210983
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017 Jul 1;109(7):
pubmed: 28423406
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Feb;39(2):208-216
pubmed: 28982791
Neuro Oncol. 2018 Sep 3;20(10):1400-1410
pubmed: 29590461
Tomography. 2017 Sep;3(3):131-137
pubmed: 30042977
Neurosurgery. 2018 Sep 17;:null
pubmed: 30239840