External validation of 18 F-FDG PET-based radiomic models on identification of residual oesophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
Journal
Nuclear medicine communications
ISSN: 1473-5628
Titre abrégé: Nucl Med Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8201017
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 08 2023
01 08 2023
Historique:
medline:
17
7
2023
pubmed:
3
5
2023
entrez:
3
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Detection of residual oesophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is important to guide treatment decisions regarding standard oesophagectomy or active surveillance. The aim was to validate previously developed 18 F-FDG PET-based radiomic models to detect residual local tumour and to repeat model development (i.e. 'model extension') in case of poor generalisability. This was a retrospective cohort study in patients collected from a prospective multicentre study in four Dutch institutes. Patients underwent nCRT followed by oesophagectomy between 2013 and 2019. Outcome was tumour regression grade (TRG) 1 (0% tumour) versus TRG 2-3-4 (≥1% tumour). Scans were acquired according to standardised protocols. Discrimination and calibration were assessed for the published models with optimism-corrected AUCs >0.77. For model extension, the development and external validation cohorts were combined. Baseline characteristics of the 189 patients included [median age 66 years (interquartile range 60-71), 158/189 male (84%), 40/189 TRG 1 (21%) and 149/189 (79%) TRG 2-3-4] were comparable to the development cohort. The model including cT stage plus the feature 'sum entropy' had best discriminative performance in external validation (AUC 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.73), with a calibration slope and intercept of 0.16 and 0.48 respectively. An extended bootstrapped LASSO model yielded an AUC of 0.65 for TRG 2-3-4 detection. The high predictive performance of the published radiomic models could not be replicated. The extended model had moderate discriminative ability. The investigated radiomic models appeared inaccurate to detect local residual oesophageal tumour and cannot be used as an adjunct tool for clinical decision-making in patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37132272
doi: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000001707
pii: 00006231-202308000-00006
pmc: PMC10337315
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
0Z5B2CJX4D
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
709-718Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Références
Shapiro J, van Lanschot JJB, Hulshof M, van Hagen P, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BP, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2015; 16:1090–1098.
van Hagen P, Hulshof MC, van Lanschot JJ, Steyerberg EW, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BPL, et al.; CROSS Group. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:2074–2084.
Eyck BM, van der Wilk BJ, Noordman BJ, Wijnhoven BPL, Lagarde SM, Hartgrink HH, et al.; SANO-study group. Updated protocol of the SANO trial: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial comparing surgery with active surveillance after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer. Trials 2021; 22:345.
Clinicaltrials.gov. Comparison of systematic surgery versus surveillance and rescue surgery in operable oesophageal cancer with a complete clinical response to radiochemotherapy (Esostrate). 2015. https://clinicaltrialsgov/ct2/show/NCT02551458 . [Accessed 1 September 2022].
Noordman BJ, Spaander MCW, Valkema R, Wijnhoven BPL, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Shapiro J, et al.; SANO study group. Detection of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer (preSANO): a prospective multicentre, diagnostic cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2018; 19:965–974.
Lambin P, Leijenaar RTH, Deist TM, Peerlings J, de Jong EEC, van Timmeren J, et al. Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2017; 14:749–762.
Beukinga RJ, Hulshoff JB, Mul VEM, Noordzij W, Kats-Ugurlu G, Slart RHJA, et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy with baseline and restaging (18)F-FDG PET imaging biomarkers in patients with esophageal cancer. Radiology 2018; 287:983–992.
Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KG. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. BMJ 2015; 350:g7594.
Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig L, et al.; STARD Group. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. BMJ 2015; 351:h5527.
Zwanenburg A, Vallières M, Abdalah MA, Aerts HJWL, Andrearczyk V, Apte A, et al. The image biomarker standardization initiative: standardized quantitative radiomics for high-throughput image-based phenotyping. Radiology 2020; 295:328–338.
Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37:181–200.
Talsma K, van Hagen P, Grotenhuis BA, Steyerberg EW, Tilanus HW, van Lanschot JJB, et al. Comparison of the 6th and 7th editions of the UICC-AJCC TNM classification for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2012; 19:2142–2148.
Chirieac LR, Swisher SG, Ajani JA, Komaki RR, Correa AM, Morris JS, et al. Posttherapy pathologic stage predicts survival in patients with esophageal carcinoma receiving preoperative chemoradiation. Cancer 2005; 103:1347–1355.
Steyerberg EW. Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to development, validation, and updating. Springer; 2009.
Chatterjee A, Vallières M, Dohan A, Levesque IR, Ueno Y, Saif S, et al. Creating robust predictive radiomic models for data from independent institutions using normalization. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci 2019; 3:210–215.
Toxopeus EL, Nieboer D, Shapiro J, Biermann K, van der Gaast A, van Rij CM, et al. Nomogram for predicting pathologically complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer. Radiother Oncol 2015; 115:392–398.
Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE Jr, Borsboom GJ, Eijkemans MJ, Vergouwe Y, Habbema JD. Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54:774–781.
Chatterjee A, Vallières M, Dohan A, Levesque IR, Ueno Y, Bist V, et al. An empirical approach for avoiding false discoveries when applying high-dimensional radiomics to small datasets. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci 2019; 3:201–209.
Mandard AM, Dalibard F, Mandard JC, Marnay J, Henry-Amar M, Petiot JF, et al. Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Clinicopathologic correlations. Cancer 1994; 73:2680–2686.
van Rossum PS, Fried DV, Zhang L, Hofstetter WL, van Vulpen M, Meijer GJ, et al. The incremental value of subjective and quantitative assessment of 18F-FDG PET for the prediction of pathologic complete response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 2016; 57:691–700.
Squires MH, Gower N, Benbow JH, Donahue EE, Bohl CE, Prabhu RS, et al. PET imaging and rate of pathologic complete response in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:1327–1333.
Tan S, Zhang H, Zhang Y, Chen W, D’Souza WD, Lu W. Predicting pathologic tumor response to chemoradiotherapy with histogram distances characterizing longitudinal changes in 18F-FDG uptake patterns. Med Phys 2013; 40:101707.
Zhang H, Tan S, Chen W, Kligerman S, Kim G, D'Souza WD, et al. Modeling pathologic response of esophageal cancer to chemoradiation therapy using spatial-temporal 18F-FDG PET features, clinical parameters, and demographics. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 88:195–203.
Valkema MJ, Noordman BJ, Wijnhoven BPL, Spaander MCW, Biermann K, Lagarde SM, et al. Accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in predicting residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 2019; 60:1553–1559.
Wagenmakers EJ, Sarafoglou A, Aczel B. One statistical analysis must not rule them all. Nature 2022; 605:423–425.
Buvat I, Orlhac F. The dark side of radiomics: on the paramount importance of publishing negative results. J Nucl Med 2019; 60:1543–1544.