nach oben

Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

01.02.2018 | Review

Radiomics as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker: Practical Considerations and the Current Standpoint in Neuro-oncologic Studies

verfasst von: Ji Eun Park, Ho Sung Kim

Erschienen in: Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 2/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Radiomics utilizes high-dimensional imaging data to discover the association with diagnostic, prognostic, predictive endpoint or radiogenomics. It is an emerging field of study that potentially depicts the intratumoral heterogeneity from quantitative and classified high-throughput data. The radiomics approach has an analytic pipeline where the imaging features are extracted, processed and analyzed. At this point, special data handling is essential because it faces issues of a high-dimensional biomarker compared to a single biomarker approach. This article describes the potential role of radiomics in oncologic studies, the basic analytic pipeline and special data handling with high-dimensional data to facilitate the radiomics approach as a tool for personalized medicine in oncology.

Zhao B, Tan Y, Tsai WY, Qi J, Xie C, Lu L, et al. Reproducibility of radiomics for deciphering tumor phenotype with imaging. Sci Rep. 2016;6:23428.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lu L, Ehmke RC, Schwartz LH, Zhao B. Assessing agreement between radiomic features computed for multiple CT imaging settings. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0166550.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Shinohara RT, Sweeney EM, Goldsmith J, Shiee N, Mateen FJ, Calabresi PA, et al. Statistical normalization techniques for magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage Clin. 2014;6:9–19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nolden M, Zelzer S, Seitel A, Wald D, Muller M, Franz AM, et al. The medical imaging interaction toolkit: challenges and advances: 10 years of open-source development. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2013;8:607–20.CrossRefPubMed

Avants BB, Tustison NJ, Song G, Cook PA, Klein A, Gee JC. A reproducible evaluation of ANTs similarity metric performance in brain image registration. NeuroImage. 2011;54:2033–44.CrossRefPubMed

Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, et al. 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;30:1323–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology. 2016;278:563–77.CrossRefPubMed

Gevaert O, Mitchell LA, Achrol AS, Xu J, Echegaray S, Steinberg GK, et al. Glioblastoma multiforme: exploratory radiogenomic analysis by using quantitative image features. Radiology. 2014;273:168–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Jain R, Poisson LM, Gutman D, Scarpace L, Hwang SN, Holder CA, et al. Outcome prediction in patients with glioblastoma by using imaging, clinical, and genomic biomarkers: focus on the nonenhancing component of the tumor. Radiology. 2014;272:484–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Lee G, Lee HY, Park H, Schiebler ML, van Beek EJR, Ohno Y, et al. Radiomics and its emerging role in lung cancer research, imaging biomarkers and clinical management: state of the art. Eur J Radiol. 2017;86:297–307.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Park JE, Kim HS, Park KJ, Choi CG, Kim SJ. Histogram analysis of amide proton transfer imaging to identify contrast-enhancing low-grade brain tumor that mimics high-grade tumor: increased accuracy of MR perfusion. Radiology. 2015;277:151–61.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Baek HJ, Kim HS, Kim N, Choi YJ, Kim YJ. Percent change of perfusion skewness and kurtosis: a potential imaging biomarker for early treatment response in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastomas. Radiology. 2012;264:834–43.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Wang JZ. Wavelets and imaging informatics: a review of the literature. J Biomed Inform. 2001;34:129–41.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Alobaidli S, McQuaid S, South C, Prakash V, Evans P, Nisbet A. The role of texture analysis in imaging as an outcome predictor and potential tool in radiotherapy treatment planning. Br J Radiol. 2014;87:20140369.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Lin YC, Lin G, Hong JH, Lin YP, Chen FH, Ng SH, et al. Diffusion radiomics analysis of intratumoral heterogeneity in a murine prostate cancer model following radiotherapy: pixelwise correlation with histology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;46(2):483–489.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Wu W, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Quackenbush J, Lambin P, Bussink J, et al. Exploratory study to identify radiomics classifiers for lung cancer histology. Front Oncol. 2016;6:71.PubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Dormann CF, Elith J, Bacher S, Buchmann C, Carl G, Carré G, et al. Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography. 2013;36:27–46.CrossRef

18.

Friedman JH. On bias, variance, 0/1 - loss, and the curse-of-dimensionality. Data Min Knowl Disc. 1997;1:55–77.CrossRef

19.

Li H, Zhu Y, Burnside ES, Huang E, Drukker K, Hoadley KA, et al. Quantitative MRI radiomics in the prediction of molecular classifications of breast cancer subtypes in the TCGA/TCIA data set. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjbcancer.2016.12.

20.

Parmar C, Grossmann P, Bussink J, Lambin P, Aerts HJ. Machine learning methods for quantitative radiomic biomarkers. Sci Rep. 2015;5:13087.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Sinnott JA, Cai T. Inference for survival prediction under the regularized Cox model. Biostatistics. 2016;17:692–707.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Du P, Ma SG, Liang H. Penalized variable selection procedure for Cox models with semiparametric relative risk. Ann Stat. 2010;38:2092–117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Hothorn T, Buhlmann P. Model-based boosting in high dimensions. Bioinformatics. 2006;22:2828–9.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Li H, Luan Y. Boosting proportional hazards models using smoothing splines, with applications to high-dimensional microarray data. Bioinformatics. 2005;21:2403–9.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Mogensen UB, Ishwaran H, Gerds TA. Evaluating random forests for survival analysis using prediction error curves. J Stat Softw. 2012;50:1–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Ishwaran H, Gerds TA, Kogalur UB, Moore RD, Gange SJ, Lau BM. Random survival forests for competing risks. Biostatistics. 2014;15:757–73.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Ishwaran H, Kogalur UB, Chen X, Minn AJ. Random survival forests for high-dimensional data. Stat Anal Data Mining. 2011;4:115–32.CrossRef

28.

Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol. 1995;57:289–300.

29.

Kuo MD, Jamshidi N. Behind the numbers: decoding molecular phenotypes with radiogenomics—guiding principles and technical considerations. Radiology. 2014;270:320–5.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Narang S, Lehrer M, Yang D, Lee J, Rao A. Radiomics in glioblastoma: current status, challenges and potential opportunities. Transl Cancer Res. 2016;5:383–97.CrossRef

31.

Zacharaki EI, Wang S, Chawla S, Yoo DS, Wolf R, Melhem ER, et al. Classification of brain tumor type and grade using MRI texture and shape in a machine learning scheme. Magn Reson Med. 2009;62:1609–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

J-b Q, Liu Z, Zhang H, Shen C, Wang X-C, Tan Y, et al. Grading of gliomas by using radiomic features on multiple magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:2168–78.CrossRef

33.

Yu J, Shi Z, Lian Y, Li Z, Liu T, Gao Y, et al. Noninvasive IDH1 mutation estimation based on a quantitative radiomics approach for grade II glioma. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:3509–22.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Lopez CJ, Nagornaya N, Parra NA, Kwon D, Ishkanian F, Markoe AM, et al. Association of radiomics and metabolic tumor volumes in radiation treatment of glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;97:586–95.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Wiestler B, Kluge A, Lukas M, Gempt J, Ringel F, Schlegel J, et al. Multiparametric MRI-based differentiation of WHO grade II/III glioma and WHO grade IV glioblastoma. Sci Rep. 2016;6:35142.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Zhou H, Vallieres M, Bai HX, Su C, Tang H, Oldridge D, et al. MRI features predict survival and molecular markers in diffuse lower-grade gliomas. Neuro Oncol. 2017;19(6):862–870.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Lee J, Narang S, Martinez JJ, Rao G, Rao A. Associating spatial diversity features of radiologically defined tumor habitats with epidermal growth factor receptor driver status and 12-month survival in glioblastoma: methods and preliminary investigation. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2015;2:041006.CrossRef

38.

Macyszyn L, Akbari H, Pisapia JM, Da X, Attiah M, Pigrish V, et al. Imaging patterns predict patient survival and molecular subtype in glioblastoma via machine learning techniques. Neuro-Oncology. 2015;18:417–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Kickingereder P, Burth S, Wick A, Gotz M, Eidel O, Schlemmer HP, et al. Radiomic profiling of glioblastoma: identifying an imaging predictor of patient survival with improved performance over established clinical and radiologic risk models. Radiology. 2016;280:880–9.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Ingrisch M, Schneider MJ, Norenberg D, Negrao de Figueiredo G, Maier-Hein K, Suchorska B, et al. Radiomic analysis reveals prognostic information in T1-weighted baseline magnetic resonance imaging in patients with glioblastoma. Investig Radiol. 2017;52:360–6.CrossRef

41.

Rao A, Rao G, Gutman DA, Flanders AE, Hwang SN, Rubin DL, et al. A combinatorial radiographic phenotype may stratify patient survival and be associated with invasion and proliferation characteristics in glioblastoma. J Neurosurg. 2016;124:1008–17.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Prasanna P, Patel J, Partovi S, Madabhushi A, Tiwari P. Radiomic features from the peritumoral brain parenchyma on treatment-naive multi-parametric MR imaging predict long versus short-term survival in glioblastoma multiforme: Preliminary findings. 2017. 27(10):4188–4197.

43.

McGarry SD, Hurrell SL, Kaczmarowski AL, Cochran EJ, Connelly J, Rand SD, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-based radiomic profiles predict patient prognosis in newly diagnosed glioblastoma before therapy. Tomography. 2016;2:223–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Kickingereder P, Gotz M, Muschelli J, Wick A, Neuberger U, Shinohara RT, et al. Large-scale radiomic profiling of recurrent glioblastoma identifies an imaging predictor for stratifying anti-angiogenic treatment response. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:5765–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Lohmann P, Lerche C, Stoffels G, Filss CP, Stegmayr C, Neumaier B, et al. P09.26 FET PET radiomics - diagnosis of pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients based on textural features. Neuro-Oncology. 2017;19:iii75–ii.CrossRef

46.

Kickingereder P, Bonekamp D, Nowosielski M, Kratz A, Sill M, Burth S, et al. Radiogenomics of glioblastoma: machine learning-based classification of molecular characteristics by using multiparametric and multiregional MR imaging features. Radiology. 2016;281:907–18.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Hu LS, Ning S, Eschbacher JM, Baxter LC, Gaw N, Ranjbar S, et al. Radiogenomics to characterize regional genetic heterogeneity in glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncology. 2017;19:128–37.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Gutman DA, Dunn WD Jr, Grossmann P, Cooper LA, Holder CA, Ligon KL, et al. Somatic mutations associated with MRI-derived volumetric features in glioblastoma. Neuroradiology. 2015;57:1227–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Jamshidi N, Diehn M, Bredel M, Kuo MD. Illuminating radiogenomic characteristics of glioblastoma multiforme through integration of MR imaging, messenger RNA expression, and DNA copy number variation. Radiology. 2014;270:1–2.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Gutman DA, Cooper LA, Hwang SN, Holder CA, Gao J, Aurora TD, et al. MR imaging predictors of molecular profile and survival: multi-institutional study of the TCGA glioblastoma data set. Radiology. 2013;267:560–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Abrol S, Kotrotsou A, Hassan A, Elshafeey N, Hassan I, Idris T, et al. Radiomic analysis of pseudo-progression compared to true progression in glioblastoma patients: a large-scale multi-institutional study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2015. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.2015

52.

O'Connor JPB, Aboagye EO, Adams JE, Aerts HJWL, Barrington SF, Beer AJ, et al. Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016;advance online publication.

Titel: Radiomics as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker: Practical Considerations and the Current Standpoint in Neuro-oncologic Studies
verfasst von: Ji Eun Park
Ho Sung Kim
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2018
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1869-3474
Elektronische ISSN: 1869-3482
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-017-0512-7

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2018

Focal Increased Tc-99m MDP Uptake in the Nutrient Foramen of the Femoral Diaphysis on Bone SPECT/CT

123I–Labeled oxLDL Is Widely Distributed Throughout the Whole Body in Mice

Message from the Editor-in-Chief: Theranostic Imaging in 2018

A Systematic Comparative Evaluation of 68Ga-Labeled RGD Peptides Conjugated with Different Chelators

Follicular Lymphoma mimicking Metastatic Nodes on the F-18 FDG PET/CT and MRI for Staging of Endometrial Cancer

Impact of 68Ga-DOTA-Peptide PET/CT on the Management of Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Tumour (GI-NET): Malaysian National Referral Centre Experience