Different radiomics annotation methods comparison in rectal cancer characterisation and prognosis prediction: a two-centre study.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Insights into Imaging Pub Date : 2024-08-26 DOI:10.1186/s13244-024-01795-5
Ying Zhu, Yaru Wei, Zhongwei Chen, Xiang Li, Shiwei Zhang, Caiyun Wen, Guoquan Cao, Jiejie Zhou, Meihao Wang
{"title":"Different radiomics annotation methods comparison in rectal cancer characterisation and prognosis prediction: a two-centre study.","authors":"Ying Zhu, Yaru Wei, Zhongwei Chen, Xiang Li, Shiwei Zhang, Caiyun Wen, Guoquan Cao, Jiejie Zhou, Meihao Wang","doi":"10.1186/s13244-024-01795-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To explore the performance differences of multiple annotations in radiomics analysis and provide a reference for tumour annotation in large-scale medical image analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 342 patients from two centres who underwent radical resection for rectal cancer were retrospectively studied and divided into training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts. Three predictive tasks of tumour T-stage (pT), lymph node metastasis (pLNM), and disease-free survival (pDFS) were performed. Twelve radiomics models were constructed using Lasso-Logistic or Lasso-Cox to evaluate and four annotation methods, 2D detailed annotation along tumour boundaries (2D), 3D detailed annotation along tumour boundaries (3D), 2D bounding box (2D<sub>BB</sub>), and 3D bounding box (3D<sub>BB</sub>) on T2-weighted images, were compared. Radiomics models were used to establish combined models incorporating clinical risk factors. The DeLong test was performed to compare the performance of models using the receiver operating characteristic curves.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For radiomics models, the area under the curve values ranged from 0.627 (0.518-0.728) to 0.811 (0.705-0.917) in the internal validation cohort and from 0.619 (0.469-0.754) to 0.824 (0.689-0.918) in the external validation cohort. Most radiomics models based on four annotations did not differ significantly, except between the 3D and 3D<sub>BB</sub> models for pLNM (p = 0.0188) in the internal validation cohort. For combined models, only the 2D model significantly differed from the 2D<sub>BB</sub> (p = 0.0372) and 3D models (p = 0.0380) for pDFS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Radiomics and combined models constructed with 2D and bounding box annotations showed comparable performances to those with 3D and detailed annotations along tumour boundaries in rectal cancer characterisation and prognosis prediction.</p><p><strong>Critical relevance statement: </strong>For quantitative analysis of radiological images, the selection of 2D maximum tumour area or bounding box annotation is as representative and easy to operate as 3D whole tumour or detailed annotations along tumour boundaries.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>There is currently a lack of discussion on whether different annotation efforts in radiomics are predictively representative. No significant differences were observed in radiomics and combined models regardless of the annotations (2D, 3D, detailed, or bounding box). Prioritise selecting the more time and effort-saving 2D maximum area bounding box annotation.</p>","PeriodicalId":13639,"journal":{"name":"Insights into Imaging","volume":"15 1","pages":"211"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11347551/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insights into Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-024-01795-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To explore the performance differences of multiple annotations in radiomics analysis and provide a reference for tumour annotation in large-scale medical image analysis.

Methods: A total of 342 patients from two centres who underwent radical resection for rectal cancer were retrospectively studied and divided into training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts. Three predictive tasks of tumour T-stage (pT), lymph node metastasis (pLNM), and disease-free survival (pDFS) were performed. Twelve radiomics models were constructed using Lasso-Logistic or Lasso-Cox to evaluate and four annotation methods, 2D detailed annotation along tumour boundaries (2D), 3D detailed annotation along tumour boundaries (3D), 2D bounding box (2DBB), and 3D bounding box (3DBB) on T2-weighted images, were compared. Radiomics models were used to establish combined models incorporating clinical risk factors. The DeLong test was performed to compare the performance of models using the receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results: For radiomics models, the area under the curve values ranged from 0.627 (0.518-0.728) to 0.811 (0.705-0.917) in the internal validation cohort and from 0.619 (0.469-0.754) to 0.824 (0.689-0.918) in the external validation cohort. Most radiomics models based on four annotations did not differ significantly, except between the 3D and 3DBB models for pLNM (p = 0.0188) in the internal validation cohort. For combined models, only the 2D model significantly differed from the 2DBB (p = 0.0372) and 3D models (p = 0.0380) for pDFS.

Conclusion: Radiomics and combined models constructed with 2D and bounding box annotations showed comparable performances to those with 3D and detailed annotations along tumour boundaries in rectal cancer characterisation and prognosis prediction.

Critical relevance statement: For quantitative analysis of radiological images, the selection of 2D maximum tumour area or bounding box annotation is as representative and easy to operate as 3D whole tumour or detailed annotations along tumour boundaries.

Key points: There is currently a lack of discussion on whether different annotation efforts in radiomics are predictively representative. No significant differences were observed in radiomics and combined models regardless of the annotations (2D, 3D, detailed, or bounding box). Prioritise selecting the more time and effort-saving 2D maximum area bounding box annotation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
直肠癌特征描述和预后预测中不同放射组学注释方法的比较:一项双中心研究。
目的探讨放射组学分析中多种注释的性能差异,为大规模医学图像分析中的肿瘤注释提供参考:方法:对两个中心共 342 名接受直肠癌根治术的患者进行回顾性研究,并将其分为训练组、内部验证组和外部验证组。进行了肿瘤T期(pT)、淋巴结转移(pLNM)和无病生存(pDFS)三项预测任务。使用 Lasso-Logistic 或 Lasso-Cox 构建了 12 个放射组学模型进行评估,并比较了四种注释方法:沿肿瘤边界的二维详细注释(2D)、沿肿瘤边界的三维详细注释(3D)、T2 加权图像上的二维边界框(2DBB)和三维边界框(3DBB)。放射组学模型用于建立包含临床风险因素的综合模型。使用接收者操作特征曲线进行DeLong检验,以比较模型的性能:对于放射组学模型,内部验证队列的曲线下面积值从 0.627(0.518-0.728)到 0.811(0.705-0.917)不等,外部验证队列的曲线下面积值从 0.619(0.469-0.754)到 0.824(0.689-0.918)不等。除了内部验证队列中 pLNM 的 3D 和 3DBB 模型之间的差异(p = 0.0188)外,大多数基于四种注释的放射组学模型没有显著差异。就组合模型而言,只有 2D 模型与 2DBB 模型(p = 0.0372)和 3D 模型(p = 0.0380)在 pDFS 方面存在显著差异:结论:在直肠癌特征描述和预后预测方面,使用二维和边界框注释构建的放射组学模型和组合模型与使用三维和肿瘤边界详细注释构建的模型性能相当:对于放射图像的定量分析,选择二维最大肿瘤面积或边界框注释与三维全肿瘤或沿肿瘤边界的详细注释一样具有代表性且易于操作:要点:关于放射组学中不同的注释方法是否具有预测代表性,目前还缺乏讨论。无论采用何种注释方式(二维、三维、详细注释或边界框),在放射组学和组合模型中均未观察到明显差异。优先选择更省时省力的二维最大面积边界框注释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Insights into Imaging
Insights into Imaging Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
182
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Insights into Imaging (I³) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen. All content published in the journal is freely available online to anyone, anywhere! I³ continuously updates scientific knowledge and progress in best-practice standards in radiology through the publication of original articles and state-of-the-art reviews and opinions, along with recommendations and statements from the leading radiological societies in Europe. Founded by the European Society of Radiology (ESR), I³ creates a platform for educational material, guidelines and recommendations, and a forum for topics of controversy. A balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes I³ an indispensable source for current information in this field. I³ is owned by the ESR, however authors retain copyright to their article according to the Creative Commons Attribution License (see Copyright and License Agreement). All articles can be read, redistributed and reused for free, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly. The open access fees (article-processing charges) for this journal are kindly sponsored by ESR for all Members. The journal went open access in 2012, which means that all articles published since then are freely available online.
期刊最新文献
Percutaneous cryoablation in soft tissue tumor management: an educational review. Computed tomography enterography-based deep learning radiomics to predict stratified healing in patients with Crohn's disease: a multicenter study. Constructing and exploring neuroimaging projects: a survey from clinical practice to scientific research. Estimated diagnostic performance of prostate MRI performed with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer. Multimodality deep learning radiomics predicts pathological response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1