1
|
Dutta A, Chan J, Haworth A, Dubowitz DJ, Kneebone A, Reynolds HM. Robustness of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography radiomic features in prostate cancer: Impact on recurrence prediction after radiation therapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 29:100530. [PMID: 38275002 PMCID: PMC10809082 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100530] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2023] [Revised: 12/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/29/2023] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Radiomic features from MRI and PET are an emerging tool with potential to improve prostate cancer outcomes. However, feature robustness due to image segmentation variations is currently unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the robustness of radiomic features with segmentation variations and their impact on predicting biochemical recurrence (BCR). Materials and methods Multi-scanner, pre-radiation therapy imaging from 142 patients with localised prostate cancer was used. Imaging included T2-weighted (T2), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) MRI, and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET. The prostate gland and intraprostatic tumours were manually and automatically segmented, and differences were quantified using Dice Coefficient (DC). Radiomic features including shape, first-order, and texture features were extracted for each segmentation from original and filtered images. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Mean Absolute Percentage Difference (MAPD) were used to assess feature robustness. Random forest (RF) models were developed for each segmentation using robust features to predict BCR. Results Prostate gland segmentations were more consistent (mean DC = 0.78) than tumour segmentations (mean DC = 0.46). 112 (3.6 %) radiomic features demonstrated 'excellent' robustness (ICC > 0.9 and MAPD < 1 %), and 480 features (15.4 %) demonstrated 'good' robustness (ICC > 0.75 and MAPD < 5 %). PET imaging provided more features with excellent robustness than T2 and ADC. RF models showed strong predictive power for BCR with a mean area under the receiver-operator-characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.89 (range 0.85-0.93). Conclusion When using radiomic features for predictive modelling, segmentation variability should be considered. To develop BCR predictive models, radiomic features from the entire prostate gland are preferable over tumour segmentation-based features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arpita Dutta
- Auckland Bioengineering Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Joseph Chan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Annette Haworth
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David J. Dubowitz
- Department of Anatomy and Medical Imaging, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
- Centre for Advanced MRI, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Andrew Kneebone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Hayley M. Reynolds
- Auckland Bioengineering Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Davoudi F, Moradi A, Becker TM, Lock JG, Abbey B, Fontanarosa D, Haworth A, Clements J, Ecker RC, Batra J. Genomic and Phenotypic Biomarkers for Precision Medicine Guidance in Advanced Prostate Cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2023; 24:1451-1471. [PMID: 37561382 PMCID: PMC10547634 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-023-01121-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023]
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most diagnosed malignant neoplasm and is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death in men worldwide. Despite significant advances in screening and treatment of PCa, given the heterogeneity of this disease, optimal personalized therapeutic strategies remain limited. However, emerging predictive and prognostic biomarkers based on individual patient profiles in combination with computer-assisted diagnostics have the potential to guide precision medicine, where patients may benefit from therapeutic approaches optimally suited to their disease. Also, the integration of genotypic and phenotypic diagnostic methods is supporting better informed treatment decisions. Focusing on advanced PCa, this review discusses polygenic risk scores for screening of PCa and common genomic aberrations in androgen receptor (AR), PTEN-PI3K-AKT, and DNA damage response (DDR) pathways, considering clinical implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment prediction. Furthermore, we evaluate liquid biopsy, protein biomarkers such as serum testosterone levels, SLFN11 expression, total alkaline phosphatase (tALP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), tissue biopsy, and advanced imaging tools, summarizing current phenotypic biomarkers and envisaging more effective utilization of diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in advanced PCa. We conclude that prognostic and treatment predictive biomarker discovery can improve the management of patients, especially in metastatic stages of advanced PCa. This will result in decreased mortality and enhanced quality of life and help design a personalized treatment regimen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fatemeh Davoudi
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Department of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
| | - Afshin Moradi
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Centre for Genomics and Personalised Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4102 Australia
| | - Therese M. Becker
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, University of Western Sydney and University of New South Wales, Liverpool, 2170 Australia
| | - John G. Lock
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, University of Western Sydney and University of New South Wales, Liverpool, 2170 Australia
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, 2052 Australia
| | - Brian Abbey
- Department of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, School of Computing Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, La Trobe Institute for Molecular Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC Australia
| | - Davide Fontanarosa
- School of Clinical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point Campus, 2 George St, Brisbane, QLD 4000 Australia
- Centre for Biomedical Technologies (CBT), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4000 Australia
| | - Annette Haworth
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006 Australia
| | - Judith Clements
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4102 Australia
| | - Rupert C. Ecker
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4102 Australia
- TissueGnostics GmbH, EU 1020 Vienna, Austria
| | - Jyotsna Batra
- School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Centre for Genomics and Personalised Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059 Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4102 Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sunoqrot MRS, Saha A, Hosseinzadeh M, Elschot M, Huisman H. Artificial intelligence for prostate MRI: open datasets, available applications, and grand challenges. Eur Radiol Exp 2022; 6:35. [PMID: 35909214 PMCID: PMC9339427 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-022-00288-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2022] [Accepted: 05/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) for prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is starting to play a clinical role for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. AI-assisted reading is feasible, allowing workflow reduction. A total of 3,369 multi-vendor prostate MRI cases are available in open datasets, acquired from 2003 to 2021 in Europe or USA at 3 T (n = 3,018; 89.6%) or 1.5 T (n = 296; 8.8%), 346 cases scanned with endorectal coil (10.3%), 3,023 (89.7%) with phased-array surface coils; 412 collected for anatomical segmentation tasks, 3,096 for PCa detection/classification; for 2,240 cases lesions delineation is available and 56 cases have matching histopathologic images; for 2,620 cases the PSA level is provided; the total size of all open datasets amounts to approximately 253 GB. Of note, quality of annotations provided per dataset highly differ and attention must be paid when using these datasets (e.g., data overlap). Seven grand challenges and commercial applications from eleven vendors are here considered. Few small studies provided prospective validation. More work is needed, in particular validation on large-scale multi-institutional, well-curated public datasets to test general applicability. Moreover, AI needs to be explored for clinical stages other than detection/characterization (e.g., follow-up, prognosis, interventions, and focal treatment).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammed R S Sunoqrot
- Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, NTNU-Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7030, Trondheim, Norway. .,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, 7030, Trondheim, Norway.
| | - Anindo Saha
- Diagnostic Image Analysis Group, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, 6525 GA, The Netherlands
| | - Matin Hosseinzadeh
- Diagnostic Image Analysis Group, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, 6525 GA, The Netherlands
| | - Mattijs Elschot
- Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, NTNU-Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7030, Trondheim, Norway.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, 7030, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Henkjan Huisman
- Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, NTNU-Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7030, Trondheim, Norway.,Diagnostic Image Analysis Group, Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, 6525 GA, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|