Tomás Gómez Vecchio, Alice Neimantaite, Erik Thurin, Julia Furtner, Ole Solheim, Johan Pallud, Mitchel Berger, Georg Widhalm, Jiri Bartek, Ida Häggström, Irene Y H Gu, Asgeir Store Jakola
{"title":"机器深度学习在2级或3级成人弥漫性胶质瘤患者中的临床应用","authors":"Tomás Gómez Vecchio, Alice Neimantaite, Erik Thurin, Julia Furtner, Ole Solheim, Johan Pallud, Mitchel Berger, Georg Widhalm, Jiri Bartek, Ida Häggström, Irene Y H Gu, Asgeir Store Jakola","doi":"10.1093/noajnl/vdae192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radiologically presumed diffuse lower-grade glioma (dLGG) are typically non or minimal enhancing tumors, with hyperintensity in T2w-images. The aim of this study was to test the clinical usefulness of deep learning (DL) in <i>IDH</i> mutation prediction in patients with radiologically presumed dLGG.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three hundred and fourteen patients were retrospectively recruited from 6 neurosurgical departments in Sweden, Norway, France, Austria, and the United States. Collected data included patients' age, sex, tumor molecular characteristics (<i>IDH</i>, and 1p19q), and routine preoperative radiological images. A clinical model was built using multivariable logistic regression with the variables age and tumor location. DL models were built using MRI data only, and 4 DL architectures used in glioma research. In the final validation test, the clinical model and the best DL model were scored on an external validation cohort with 155 patients from the Erasmus Glioma Dataset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age in the recruited and external cohorts was 45.0 (SD 14.3) and 44.3 years (SD 14.6). The cohorts were rather similar, except for sex distribution (53.5% vs 64.5% males, <i>P</i>-value = .03) and <i>IDH</i> status (30.9% vs 12.9% <i>IDH</i> wild-type, <i>P</i>-value <.01). Overall, the area under the curve for the prediction of <i>IDH</i> mutations in the external validation cohort was 0.86, 0.82, and 0.87 for the clinical model, the DL model, and the model combining both models' probabilities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In their current state, when these complex models were applied to our clinical scenario, they did not seem to provide a net gain compared to our baseline clinical model.</p>","PeriodicalId":94157,"journal":{"name":"Neuro-oncology advances","volume":"6 1","pages":"vdae192"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11631182/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical application of machine-based deep learning in patients with radiologically presumed adult-type diffuse glioma grades 2 or 3.\",\"authors\":\"Tomás Gómez Vecchio, Alice Neimantaite, Erik Thurin, Julia Furtner, Ole Solheim, Johan Pallud, Mitchel Berger, Georg Widhalm, Jiri Bartek, Ida Häggström, Irene Y H Gu, Asgeir Store Jakola\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/noajnl/vdae192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radiologically presumed diffuse lower-grade glioma (dLGG) are typically non or minimal enhancing tumors, with hyperintensity in T2w-images. The aim of this study was to test the clinical usefulness of deep learning (DL) in <i>IDH</i> mutation prediction in patients with radiologically presumed dLGG.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three hundred and fourteen patients were retrospectively recruited from 6 neurosurgical departments in Sweden, Norway, France, Austria, and the United States. Collected data included patients' age, sex, tumor molecular characteristics (<i>IDH</i>, and 1p19q), and routine preoperative radiological images. A clinical model was built using multivariable logistic regression with the variables age and tumor location. DL models were built using MRI data only, and 4 DL architectures used in glioma research. In the final validation test, the clinical model and the best DL model were scored on an external validation cohort with 155 patients from the Erasmus Glioma Dataset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age in the recruited and external cohorts was 45.0 (SD 14.3) and 44.3 years (SD 14.6). The cohorts were rather similar, except for sex distribution (53.5% vs 64.5% males, <i>P</i>-value = .03) and <i>IDH</i> status (30.9% vs 12.9% <i>IDH</i> wild-type, <i>P</i>-value <.01). Overall, the area under the curve for the prediction of <i>IDH</i> mutations in the external validation cohort was 0.86, 0.82, and 0.87 for the clinical model, the DL model, and the model combining both models' probabilities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In their current state, when these complex models were applied to our clinical scenario, they did not seem to provide a net gain compared to our baseline clinical model.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94157,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuro-oncology advances\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"vdae192\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11631182/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuro-oncology advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/noajnl/vdae192\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuro-oncology advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/noajnl/vdae192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:影像学推定弥漫性低级别胶质瘤(dLGG)是典型的非或微弱增强肿瘤,在t2w图像上表现为高强度。本研究的目的是测试深度学习(DL)在影像学推定为dLGG的患者中IDH突变预测中的临床实用性。方法:从瑞典、挪威、法国、奥地利和美国的6个神经外科部门回顾性招募314例患者。收集的资料包括患者的年龄、性别、肿瘤分子特征(IDH和1p19q)以及术前常规影像学图像。以年龄和肿瘤部位为变量,采用多变量logistic回归建立临床模型。仅使用MRI数据建立DL模型,并在胶质瘤研究中使用4个DL架构。在最后的验证测试中,临床模型和最佳DL模型在来自Erasmus胶质瘤数据集的155名患者的外部验证队列中进行评分。结果:招募组和外部组的平均年龄分别为45.0岁(SD 14.3)和44.3岁(SD 14.6)。除了性别分布(53.5% vs 64.5%男性,p值= 0.03)和IDH状态(30.9% vs 12.9% IDH野生型)之外,外部验证队列中临床模型、DL模型和结合两种模型概率的模型的IDH突变p值分别为0.86、0.82和0.87。结论:在目前的状态下,当这些复杂的模型应用于我们的临床场景时,与我们的基线临床模型相比,它们似乎没有提供净收益。
Clinical application of machine-based deep learning in patients with radiologically presumed adult-type diffuse glioma grades 2 or 3.
Background: Radiologically presumed diffuse lower-grade glioma (dLGG) are typically non or minimal enhancing tumors, with hyperintensity in T2w-images. The aim of this study was to test the clinical usefulness of deep learning (DL) in IDH mutation prediction in patients with radiologically presumed dLGG.
Methods: Three hundred and fourteen patients were retrospectively recruited from 6 neurosurgical departments in Sweden, Norway, France, Austria, and the United States. Collected data included patients' age, sex, tumor molecular characteristics (IDH, and 1p19q), and routine preoperative radiological images. A clinical model was built using multivariable logistic regression with the variables age and tumor location. DL models were built using MRI data only, and 4 DL architectures used in glioma research. In the final validation test, the clinical model and the best DL model were scored on an external validation cohort with 155 patients from the Erasmus Glioma Dataset.
Results: The mean age in the recruited and external cohorts was 45.0 (SD 14.3) and 44.3 years (SD 14.6). The cohorts were rather similar, except for sex distribution (53.5% vs 64.5% males, P-value = .03) and IDH status (30.9% vs 12.9% IDH wild-type, P-value <.01). Overall, the area under the curve for the prediction of IDH mutations in the external validation cohort was 0.86, 0.82, and 0.87 for the clinical model, the DL model, and the model combining both models' probabilities.
Conclusions: In their current state, when these complex models were applied to our clinical scenario, they did not seem to provide a net gain compared to our baseline clinical model.