The on-going quest for treatment precision and conformality in radiotherapy

Strategies to develop radiomics and machine learning models for lung cancer stage and histology prediction using small data samples

Predictive models based on radiomics and machine-learning (ML) need large and annotated datasets for training, often difficult to collect. We designed an operative pipeline for model training to exploit data already available to the scientific community. The aim of this work was to explore the capability of radiomic features in predicting tumor histology and stage in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We analyzed the radiotherapy planning thoracic CT scans of a proprietary sample of 47 subjects (L-RT) and integrated this dataset with a publicly available set of 130 patients from the MAASTRO NSCLC collection (Lung1). We implemented intra- and inter-sample cross-validation strategies (CV) for evaluating the ML predictive model performances with not so large datasets. We carried out two classification tasks: histology classification (3 classes) and overall stage classification (two classes: stage I and II). In the first task, the best performance was obtained by a Random Forest classifier, once the analysis has been restricted to stage I and II tumors of the Lung1 and L-RT merged dataset (AUC = 0.72 ± 0.11). For the overall stage classification, the best results were obtained when training on Lung1 and testing of L-RT dataset (AUC = 0.72 ± 0.04 for Random Forest and AUC = 0.84 ± 0.03 for linear-kernel Support Vector Machine). According to the classification task to be accomplished and to the heterogeneity of the available dataset(s), different CV strategies have to be explored and compared to make a robust assessment of the potential of a predictive model based on radiomics and ML.

Accuracy of automatic deformable structure propagation for high-field MRI guided prostate radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

In this study we have evaluated the accuracy of automatic, deformable structure propagation from planning CT and MR scans for daily online plan adaptation for MR linac (MRL) treatment, which is an important element to minimize re-planning time and reduce the risk of misrepresenting the target due to this time pressure.

METHODS

For 12 high-risk prostate cancer patients treated to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes, target structures and organs at risk were delineated on both planning MR and CT scans and propagated using deformable registration to three T2 weighted MR scans acquired during the treatment course. Generated structures were evaluated against manual delineations on the repeated scans using intra-observer variation obtained on the planning MR as ground truth.

RESULTS

MR-to-MR propagated structures had significant less median surface distance and larger Dice similarity index compared to CT-MR propagation. The MR-MR propagation uncertainty was similar in magnitude to the intra-observer variation. Visual inspection of the deformed structures revealed that small anatomical differences between organs in source and destination image sets were generally well accounted for while large differences were not.

CONCLUSION

Both CT and MR based propagations require manual editing, but the current results show that MR-to-MR propagated structures require fewer corrections for high risk prostate cancer patients treated at a high-field MRL.

CT-based radiomic analysis of stereotactic body radiation therapy patients with lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Radiomics uses a large number of quantitative imaging features that describe the tumor phenotype to develop imaging biomarkers for clinical outcomes. Radiomic analysis of pre-treatment computed-tomography (CT) scans was investigated to identify imaging predictors of clinical outcomes in early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CT images of 113 stage I-II NSCLC patients treated with SBRT were analyzed. Twelve radiomic features were selected based on stability and variance. The association of features with clinical outcomes and their prognostic value (using the concordance index (CI)) was evaluated. Radiomic features were compared with conventional imaging metrics (tumor volume and diameter) and clinical parameters.

RESULTS

Overall survival was associated with two conventional features (volume and diameter) and two radiomic features (LoG 3D run low gray level short run emphasis and stats median). One radiomic feature (Wavelet LLH stats range) was significantly prognostic for distant metastasis (CI=0.67, q-value<0.1), while none of the conventional and clinical parameters were. Three conventional and four radiomic features were prognostic for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory analysis demonstrates that radiomic features have potential to be prognostic for some outcomes that conventional imaging metrics cannot predict in SBRT patients.