An Explainable MRI-Radiomic Quantum Neural Network to Differentiate Between Large Brain Metastases and High-Grade Glioma Using Quantum Annealing for Feature Selection.
Brain metastasis
Glioma
Machine Learning
Quantum annealing
Variational classifier
Journal
Journal of digital imaging
ISSN: 1618-727X
Titre abrégé: J Digit Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9100529
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2023
12 2023
Historique:
received:
19
04
2023
accepted:
17
07
2023
revised:
11
06
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
29
7
2023
entrez:
28
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Solitary large brain metastases (LBM) and high-grade gliomas (HGG) are sometimes hard to differentiate on MRI. The management differs significantly between these two entities, and non-invasive methods that help differentiate between them are eagerly needed to avoid potentially morbid biopsies and surgical procedures. We explore herein the performance and interpretability of an MRI-radiomics variational quantum neural network (QNN) using a quantum-annealing mutual-information (MI) feature selection approach. We retrospectively included 423 patients with HGG and LBM (> 2 cm) who had a contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (CE-T1) MRI between 2012 and 2019. After exclusion, 72 HGG and 129 LBM were kept. Tumors were manually segmented, and a 5-mm peri-tumoral ring was created. MRI images were pre-processed, and 1813 radiomic features were extracted. A set of best features based on MI was selected. MI and conditional-MI were embedded into a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) formulation that was mapped to an Ising-model and submitted to D'Wave's quantum annealer to solve for the best combination of 10 features. The 10 selected features were embedded into a 2-qubits QNN using PennyLane library. The model was evaluated for balanced-accuracy (bACC) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) on the test set. The model performance was benchmarked against two classical models: dense neural networks (DNN) and extreme gradient boosting (XGB). Shapley values were calculated to interpret sample-wise predictions on the test set. The best 10-feature combination included 6 tumor and 4 ring features. For QNN, DNN, and XGB, respectively, training ROC-AUC was 0.86, 0.95, and 0.94; test ROC-AUC was 0.76, 0.75, and 0.79; and test bACC was 0.74, 0.73, and 0.72. The two most influential features were tumor Laplacian-of-Gaussian-GLRLM-Entropy and sphericity. We developed an accurate interpretable QNN model with quantum-informed feature selection to differentiate between LBM and HGG on CE-T1 brain MRI. The model performance is comparable to state-of-the-art classical models.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37507581
doi: 10.1007/s10278-023-00886-x
pii: 10.1007/s10278-023-00886-x
pmc: PMC10584786
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2335-2346Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
IEEE Signal Process Mag. 2019 Jan;36(1):164-173
pubmed: 31543691
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019 Jan 17;5(1):5
pubmed: 30655533
Nature. 2017 Oct 18;550(7676):375-379
pubmed: 29052620
Ann Oncol. 2021 Nov;32(11):1332-1347
pubmed: 34364998
J Pers Med. 2022 Feb 13;12(2):
pubmed: 35207763
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 21;10(1):12110
pubmed: 32694637
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 23;10(1):12340
pubmed: 32704007
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 17;11(1):3973
pubmed: 33597610
Front Oncol. 2021 Jul 13;11:638262
pubmed: 34327133
J Clin Oncol. 2022 Feb 1;40(4):403-426
pubmed: 34898238
Rep Prog Phys. 2018 Jul;81(7):074001
pubmed: 29504942
Radiology. 2016 Feb;278(2):563-77
pubmed: 26579733
Oncotarget. 2016 Oct 18;7(42):69051-69059
pubmed: 27655705
Med Image Anal. 2017 Jan;35:303-312
pubmed: 27497072
Neuroradiology. 2015 Jul;57(7):697-703
pubmed: 25845813
Nat Commun. 2021 May 11;12(1):2631
pubmed: 33976136
Sci Rep. 2021 May 18;11(1):10478
pubmed: 34006893
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2019 Mar;10949:
pubmed: 31551645
Radiology. 2020 May;295(2):328-338
pubmed: 32154773
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021 Mar;18(3):170-186
pubmed: 33293629
Hum Brain Mapp. 2002 Nov;17(3):143-55
pubmed: 12391568
Eur Radiol. 2018 Sep;28(9):3819-3831
pubmed: 29619517
Hum Brain Mapp. 2019 Dec 1;40(17):4952-4964
pubmed: 31403237
Cancer Res. 2017 Nov 1;77(21):e104-e107
pubmed: 29092951
Metabolites. 2022 Dec 14;12(12):
pubmed: 36557302
Eur J Cancer. 2012 Mar;48(4):441-6
pubmed: 22257792
NMR Biomed. 2021 Apr;34(4):e4479
pubmed: 33448078
PLoS Med. 2018 Nov 30;15(11):e1002711
pubmed: 30500819
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010 Jun;29(6):1310-20
pubmed: 20378467
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2013 Sep;8(5):751-61
pubmed: 23334798
Neuro Oncol. 2022 Oct 5;24(Suppl 5):v1-v95
pubmed: 36196752
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Jul;39(7):1208-1214
pubmed: 29724766
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2010 Nov;152(11):1893-9
pubmed: 20799046
Nat Commun. 2022 Aug 22;13(1):4919
pubmed: 35995777
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Mar 08;14(6):
pubmed: 35326526
J Neuroradiol. 2020 May;47(3):197-202
pubmed: 30439396
Nature. 2017 Sep 13;549(7671):195-202
pubmed: 28905917
Soft comput. 2022 Apr 7;:1-20
pubmed: 35411203
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2022 Jul-Aug;12(4):265-282
pubmed: 35534352