基于放射组学的多转移治疗方法:定量综述

Caryn Geady, Hemangini Patel, Jacob Peoples, Amber Simpson, Benjamin Haibe-Kains
{"title":"基于放射组学的多转移治疗方法:定量综述","authors":"Caryn Geady, Hemangini Patel, Jacob Peoples, Amber Simpson, Benjamin Haibe-Kains","doi":"10.1101/2024.07.04.24309964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background\nRadiomics traditionally focuses on analyzing a single lesion within a patient to extract tumor characteristics, yet this process may overlook inter-lesion heterogeneity, particularly in the multi-metastatic setting. There is currently no established method for combining radiomic features in such settings, leading to diverse approaches with varying strengths and limitations. Our quantitative review aims to illuminate these methodologies, assess their replicability, and guide future research toward establishing best practices, offering insights into the challenges of multi-lesion radiomic analysis across diverse datasets.\nMethods\nWe conducted a comprehensive literature search to identify methods for integrating data from multiple lesions in radiomic analyses. We replicated these methods using either the author's code or by reconstructing them based on the information provided in the papers. Subsequently, we applied these identified methods to three distinct datasets, each depicting a different metastatic scenario.\nResults\nWe compared ten mathematical methods for combining radiomic features across three distinct datasets, encompassing a total of 16,850 lesions in 3,930 patients. Performance of these methods was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model and benchmarked against univariable analysis of total tumor volume. We observed variable performance in methods across datasets. However, no single method consistently outperformed others across all datasets. Notably, while some methods surpassed total tumor volume analysis in certain datasets, others did not. Averaging methods showed higher median performance in patients with colorectal liver metastases, and in soft tissue sarcoma, concatenation of radiomic features from different lesions exhibited the highest median performance among tested methods. Conclusions\nRadiomic features can be effectively selected or combined to estimate patient-level outcomes in multi-metastatic patients, though the approach varies by metastatic setting. Our study fills a critical gap in radiomics research by examining the challenges of radiomic-based analysis in this setting. Through a comprehensive review and rigorous testing of different methods across diverse datasets representing unique metastatic scenarios, we provide valuable insights into effective radiomic analysis strategies.","PeriodicalId":501358,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Radiology and Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiomic-Based Approaches in the Multi-metastatic Setting: a Quantitative Review\",\"authors\":\"Caryn Geady, Hemangini Patel, Jacob Peoples, Amber Simpson, Benjamin Haibe-Kains\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.07.04.24309964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background\\nRadiomics traditionally focuses on analyzing a single lesion within a patient to extract tumor characteristics, yet this process may overlook inter-lesion heterogeneity, particularly in the multi-metastatic setting. There is currently no established method for combining radiomic features in such settings, leading to diverse approaches with varying strengths and limitations. Our quantitative review aims to illuminate these methodologies, assess their replicability, and guide future research toward establishing best practices, offering insights into the challenges of multi-lesion radiomic analysis across diverse datasets.\\nMethods\\nWe conducted a comprehensive literature search to identify methods for integrating data from multiple lesions in radiomic analyses. We replicated these methods using either the author's code or by reconstructing them based on the information provided in the papers. Subsequently, we applied these identified methods to three distinct datasets, each depicting a different metastatic scenario.\\nResults\\nWe compared ten mathematical methods for combining radiomic features across three distinct datasets, encompassing a total of 16,850 lesions in 3,930 patients. Performance of these methods was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model and benchmarked against univariable analysis of total tumor volume. We observed variable performance in methods across datasets. However, no single method consistently outperformed others across all datasets. Notably, while some methods surpassed total tumor volume analysis in certain datasets, others did not. Averaging methods showed higher median performance in patients with colorectal liver metastases, and in soft tissue sarcoma, concatenation of radiomic features from different lesions exhibited the highest median performance among tested methods. Conclusions\\nRadiomic features can be effectively selected or combined to estimate patient-level outcomes in multi-metastatic patients, though the approach varies by metastatic setting. Our study fills a critical gap in radiomics research by examining the challenges of radiomic-based analysis in this setting. Through a comprehensive review and rigorous testing of different methods across diverse datasets representing unique metastatic scenarios, we provide valuable insights into effective radiomic analysis strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Radiology and Imaging\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Radiology and Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.04.24309964\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.04.24309964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景放射组学传统上侧重于分析患者体内的单个病灶以提取肿瘤特征,但这一过程可能会忽略病灶间的异质性,尤其是在多发转移的情况下。目前还没有一种成熟的方法可以在这种情况下结合放射组学特征,从而产生了具有不同优势和局限性的各种方法。我们的定量综述旨在阐明这些方法,评估它们的可复制性,并指导未来的研究以建立最佳实践,为跨不同数据集的多病灶放射组学分析所面临的挑战提供见解。我们使用作者的代码或根据论文中提供的信息重新构建了这些方法。随后,我们将这些已确定的方法应用于三个不同的数据集,每个数据集都描述了不同的转移情况。结果我们比较了十种数学方法,这些方法用于在三个不同的数据集中整合放射学特征,共包括 3,930 名患者的 16,850 个病灶。我们使用 Cox 比例危险模型评估了这些方法的性能,并以肿瘤总体积的单变量分析作为基准。我们观察到不同数据集的方法性能各不相同。不过,在所有数据集中,没有一种方法的性能始终优于其他方法。值得注意的是,有些方法在某些数据集上超过了肿瘤总体积分析,而有些方法则没有。平均方法在结直肠肝转移患者中表现出更高的中位数性能,而在软组织肉瘤中,来自不同病变的放射学特征的合并在测试方法中表现出最高的中位数性能。结论可以有效地选择或组合放射学特征来估计多发性转移患者的患者水平预后,但方法因转移情况而异。我们的研究填补了放射组学研究的一个重要空白,研究了在这种情况下基于放射组学分析所面临的挑战。通过对代表独特转移情况的不同数据集的不同方法进行全面回顾和严格测试,我们为有效的放射组学分析策略提供了宝贵的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Radiomic-Based Approaches in the Multi-metastatic Setting: a Quantitative Review
Background Radiomics traditionally focuses on analyzing a single lesion within a patient to extract tumor characteristics, yet this process may overlook inter-lesion heterogeneity, particularly in the multi-metastatic setting. There is currently no established method for combining radiomic features in such settings, leading to diverse approaches with varying strengths and limitations. Our quantitative review aims to illuminate these methodologies, assess their replicability, and guide future research toward establishing best practices, offering insights into the challenges of multi-lesion radiomic analysis across diverse datasets. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search to identify methods for integrating data from multiple lesions in radiomic analyses. We replicated these methods using either the author's code or by reconstructing them based on the information provided in the papers. Subsequently, we applied these identified methods to three distinct datasets, each depicting a different metastatic scenario. Results We compared ten mathematical methods for combining radiomic features across three distinct datasets, encompassing a total of 16,850 lesions in 3,930 patients. Performance of these methods was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model and benchmarked against univariable analysis of total tumor volume. We observed variable performance in methods across datasets. However, no single method consistently outperformed others across all datasets. Notably, while some methods surpassed total tumor volume analysis in certain datasets, others did not. Averaging methods showed higher median performance in patients with colorectal liver metastases, and in soft tissue sarcoma, concatenation of radiomic features from different lesions exhibited the highest median performance among tested methods. Conclusions Radiomic features can be effectively selected or combined to estimate patient-level outcomes in multi-metastatic patients, though the approach varies by metastatic setting. Our study fills a critical gap in radiomics research by examining the challenges of radiomic-based analysis in this setting. Through a comprehensive review and rigorous testing of different methods across diverse datasets representing unique metastatic scenarios, we provide valuable insights into effective radiomic analysis strategies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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