Deep learning MRI models for the differential diagnosis of tumefactive demyelination versus IDH-wildtype glioblastoma.

Gian Marco Conte, Mana Moassefi, Paul A Decker, Matthew L Kosel, Christina B McCarthy, Jessica A Sagen, Yalda Nikanpour, Mahboubeh Fereidan-Esfahani, Michael W Ruff, Fiorella S Guido, Heather K Pump, Terry C Burns, Robert B Jenkins, Bradley J Erickson, Daniel H Lachance, W Oliver Tobin, Jeanette E Eckel-Passow
{"title":"Deep learning MRI models for the differential diagnosis of tumefactive demyelination versus <i>IDH</i>-wildtype glioblastoma.","authors":"Gian Marco Conte, Mana Moassefi, Paul A Decker, Matthew L Kosel, Christina B McCarthy, Jessica A Sagen, Yalda Nikanpour, Mahboubeh Fereidan-Esfahani, Michael W Ruff, Fiorella S Guido, Heather K Pump, Terry C Burns, Robert B Jenkins, Bradley J Erickson, Daniel H Lachance, W Oliver Tobin, Jeanette E Eckel-Passow","doi":"10.3174/ajnr.A8645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Diagnosis of tumefactive demyelination can be challenging. The diagnosis of indeterminate brain lesions on MRI often requires tissue confirmation via brain biopsy. Noninvasive methods for accurate diagnosis of tumor and non-tumor etiologies allows for tailored therapy, optimal tumor control, and a reduced risk of iatrogenic morbidity and mortality. Tumefactive demyelination has imaging features that mimic <i>isocitrate dehydrogenase</i>-wildtype glioblastoma (<i>IDH</i>wt GBM). We hypothesized that deep learning applied to postcontrast T1-weighted (T1C) and T2-weighted (T2) MRI images can discriminate tumefactive demyelination from <i>IDH</i>wt GBM.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with tumefactive demyelination (n=144) and <i>IDH</i>wt GBM (n=455) were identified by clinical registries. A 3D DenseNet121 architecture was used to develop models to differentiate tumefactive demyelination and <i>IDH</i>wt GBM using both T1C and T2 MRI images, as well as only T1C and only T2 images. A three-stage design was used: (i) model development and internal validation via five-fold cross validation using a sex-, age-, and MRI technology-matched set of tumefactive demyelination and <i>IDH</i>wt GBM, (ii) validation of model specificity on independent <i>IDH</i>wt GBM, and (iii) prospective validation on tumefactive demyelination and <i>IDH</i>wt GBM. Stratified AUCs were used to evaluate model performance stratified by sex, age at diagnosis, MRI scanner strength, and MRI acquisition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The deep learning model developed using both T1C and T2 images had a prospective validation area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 88% (95% CI: 0.82 - 0.95). In the prospective validation stage, a model score threshold of 0.28 resulted in 91% sensitivity of correctly classifying tumefactive demyelination and 80% specificity (correctly classifying <i>IDH</i>wt GBM). Stratified AUCs demonstrated that model performance may be improved if thresholds were chosen stratified by age and MRI acquisition.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MRI images can provide the basis for applying deep learning models to aid in the differential diagnosis of brain lesions. Further validation is needed to evaluate how well the model generalizes across institutions, patient populations, and technology, and to evaluate optimal thresholds for classification. Next steps also should incorporate additional tumor etiologies such as CNS lymphoma and brain metastases.</p><p><strong>Abbreviations: </strong>AUC = area under the receiver operator characteristic curve; CNS = central nervous system; CNSIDD = central nervous system inflammatory demyelinating disease; FeTS = federated tumor segmentation; GBM = glioblastoma; <i>IDH</i>wt = <i>isocitrate dehydrogenase</i> wildtype; IHC = immunohistochemistry; MOGAD = myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody associated disorder; MS = multiple sclerosis; NMOSD = neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder; wt = wildtype.</p>","PeriodicalId":93863,"journal":{"name":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8645","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: Diagnosis of tumefactive demyelination can be challenging. The diagnosis of indeterminate brain lesions on MRI often requires tissue confirmation via brain biopsy. Noninvasive methods for accurate diagnosis of tumor and non-tumor etiologies allows for tailored therapy, optimal tumor control, and a reduced risk of iatrogenic morbidity and mortality. Tumefactive demyelination has imaging features that mimic isocitrate dehydrogenase-wildtype glioblastoma (IDHwt GBM). We hypothesized that deep learning applied to postcontrast T1-weighted (T1C) and T2-weighted (T2) MRI images can discriminate tumefactive demyelination from IDHwt GBM.

Materials and methods: Patients with tumefactive demyelination (n=144) and IDHwt GBM (n=455) were identified by clinical registries. A 3D DenseNet121 architecture was used to develop models to differentiate tumefactive demyelination and IDHwt GBM using both T1C and T2 MRI images, as well as only T1C and only T2 images. A three-stage design was used: (i) model development and internal validation via five-fold cross validation using a sex-, age-, and MRI technology-matched set of tumefactive demyelination and IDHwt GBM, (ii) validation of model specificity on independent IDHwt GBM, and (iii) prospective validation on tumefactive demyelination and IDHwt GBM. Stratified AUCs were used to evaluate model performance stratified by sex, age at diagnosis, MRI scanner strength, and MRI acquisition.

Results: The deep learning model developed using both T1C and T2 images had a prospective validation area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 88% (95% CI: 0.82 - 0.95). In the prospective validation stage, a model score threshold of 0.28 resulted in 91% sensitivity of correctly classifying tumefactive demyelination and 80% specificity (correctly classifying IDHwt GBM). Stratified AUCs demonstrated that model performance may be improved if thresholds were chosen stratified by age and MRI acquisition.

Conclusions: MRI images can provide the basis for applying deep learning models to aid in the differential diagnosis of brain lesions. Further validation is needed to evaluate how well the model generalizes across institutions, patient populations, and technology, and to evaluate optimal thresholds for classification. Next steps also should incorporate additional tumor etiologies such as CNS lymphoma and brain metastases.

Abbreviations: AUC = area under the receiver operator characteristic curve; CNS = central nervous system; CNSIDD = central nervous system inflammatory demyelinating disease; FeTS = federated tumor segmentation; GBM = glioblastoma; IDHwt = isocitrate dehydrogenase wildtype; IHC = immunohistochemistry; MOGAD = myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody associated disorder; MS = multiple sclerosis; NMOSD = neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder; wt = wildtype.

肿瘤性脱髓鞘与idh野生型胶质母细胞瘤的深度学习MRI模型鉴别诊断。
背景与目的:肿瘤脱髓鞘的诊断具有挑战性。MRI诊断不确定的脑病变通常需要通过脑活检进行组织确认。准确诊断肿瘤和非肿瘤病因的非侵入性方法允许定制治疗,最佳肿瘤控制,并降低医源性发病率和死亡率的风险。肿瘤性脱髓鞘具有类似异柠檬酸脱氢酶野生型胶质母细胞瘤(IDHwt GBM)的影像学特征。我们假设将深度学习应用于对比后的t1加权(T1C)和T2加权(T2) MRI图像可以区分肿瘤性脱髓鞘和IDHwt GBM。材料和方法:通过临床登记鉴定肿瘤脱髓鞘(n=144)和IDHwt GBM (n=455)。使用3D DenseNet121架构建立模型,使用T1C和T2 MRI图像,以及仅T1C和T2图像来区分肿瘤性脱髓鞘和IDHwt GBM。采用了三个阶段的设计:(i)模型开发和内部验证,通过使用性别、年龄和MRI技术匹配的一组肿瘤脱髓鞘和IDHwt GBM的五倍交叉验证,(ii)验证模型对独立IDHwt GBM的特异性,以及(iii)对肿瘤脱髓鞘和IDHwt GBM的前瞻性验证。分层auc用于评估按性别、诊断年龄、MRI扫描仪强度和MRI采集分层的模型性能。结果:使用T1C和T2图像开发的深度学习模型在接收者操作员特征曲线(AUC)下的预期验证区域为88% (95% CI: 0.82 - 0.95)。在前瞻性验证阶段,模型评分阈值为0.28,正确分类肿瘤脱髓鞘的敏感性为91%,特异性为80%(正确分类IDHwt GBM)。分层auc表明,如果根据年龄和MRI采集分层选择阈值,则模型性能可能会得到改善。结论:MRI图像可为应用深度学习模型辅助脑病变鉴别诊断提供依据。需要进一步的验证来评估该模型在机构、患者群体和技术方面的泛化程度,并评估分类的最佳阈值。下一步还应纳入其他肿瘤病因,如中枢神经系统淋巴瘤和脑转移。缩写:AUC =接收算子特征曲线下面积;中枢神经系统;中枢神经系统炎症性脱髓鞘病;fts =联合肿瘤分割;GBM =胶质母细胞瘤;异柠檬酸脱氢酶野生型;免疫组化;髓鞘少突胶质细胞糖蛋白抗体相关疾病;MS =多发性硬化症;NMOSD =神经脊髓炎视谱障碍;Wt = wildtype。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信