1
|
Gong AJ, Ruchalski K, Kim HJ, Douek M, Gutierrez A, Patel M, Sai V, Coy H, Villegas B, Raman S, Goldin J. RECIST 1.1 Target Lesion Categorical Response in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Comparison of Conventional versus Volumetric Assessment. Radiol Imaging Cancer 2023; 5:e220166. [PMID: 37656041 PMCID: PMC10546365 DOI: 10.1148/rycan.220166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Revised: 07/05/2023] [Accepted: 07/18/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023]
Abstract
Purpose To investigate Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) approximations of target lesion tumor burden by comparing categorical treatment response according to conventional RECIST versus actual tumor volume measurements of RECIST target lesions. Materials and Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of individuals with metastatic renal cell carcinoma enrolled in a clinical trial (from 2003 to 2017) and includes individuals who underwent baseline and at least one follow-up chest, abdominal, and pelvic CT study and with at least one target lesion. Target lesion volume was assessed by (a) Vmodel, a spherical model of conventional RECIST 1.1, which was extrapolated from RECIST diameter, and (b) Vactual, manually contoured volume. Volumetric responses were determined by the sum of target lesion volumes (Vmodel-sum TL and Vactual-sum TL, respectively). Categorical volumetric thresholds were extrapolated from RECIST. McNemar tests were used to compare categorical volume responses. Results Target lesions were assessed at baseline (638 participants), week 9 (593 participants), and week 17 (508 participants). Vmodel-sum TL classified more participants as having progressive disease (PD), compared with Vactual-sum TL at week 9 (52 vs 31 participants) and week 17 (57 vs 39 participants), with significant overall response discordance (P < .001). At week 9, 25 (48%) of 52 participants labeled with PD by Vmodel-sum TL were classified as having stable disease by Vactual-sum TL. Conclusion A model of RECIST 1.1 based on a single diameter measurement more frequently classified PD compared with response assessment by actual measured tumor volume. Keywords: Urinary, Kidney, Metastases, Oncology, Tumor Response, Volume Analysis, Outcomes Analysis ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT01865747 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda J. Gong
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Kathleen Ruchalski
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Hyun J. Kim
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Michael Douek
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Antonio Gutierrez
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Maitraya Patel
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Victor Sai
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Heidi Coy
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Bianca Villegas
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Steven Raman
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| | - Jonathan Goldin
- From the David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California,
Los Angeles, Calif (A.J.G., K.R., H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., H.C., S.R.,
J.G.); Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif (K.R.,
H.J.K., M.D., A.G., M.P., V.S., S.R., J.G.); and UCLA Center for Computer Vision
and Imaging Biomarkers, 924 Westwood Blvd, Ste 615, Los Angeles, CA 90024
(A.J.G., H.J.K., H.C., B.V., J.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chartrand G, Emiliani RD, Pawlowski SA, Markel DA, Bahig H, Cengarle-Samak A, Rajakesari S, Lavoie J, Ducharme S, Roberge D. Automated Detection of Brain Metastases on T1-Weighted MRI Using a Convolutional Neural Network: Impact of Volume Aware Loss and Sampling Strategy. J Magn Reson Imaging 2022; 56:1885-1898. [PMID: 35624544 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.28274] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2022] [Revised: 05/13/2022] [Accepted: 05/13/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Detection of brain metastases (BM) and segmentation for treatment planning could be optimized with machine learning methods. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are promising, but their trade-offs between sensitivity and precision frequently lead to missing small lesions. HYPOTHESIS Combining volume aware (VA) loss function and sampling strategy could improve BM detection sensitivity. STUDY TYPE Retrospective. POPULATION A total of 530 radiation oncology patients (55% women) were split into a training/validation set (433 patients/1460 BM) and an independent test set (97 patients/296 BM). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE 1.5 T and 3 T, contrast-enhanced three-dimensional (3D) T1-weighted fast gradient echo sequences. ASSESSMENT Ground truth masks were based on radiotherapy treatment planning contours reviewed by experts. A U-Net inspired model was trained. Three loss functions (Dice, Dice + boundary, and VA) and two sampling methods (label and VA) were compared. Results were reported with Dice scores, volumetric error, lesion detection sensitivity, and precision. A detected voxel within the ground truth constituted a true positive. STATISTICAL TESTS McNemar's exact test to compare detected lesions between models. Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis to compare volume agreement between predicted and ground truth volumes. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ 0.05. RESULTS Combining VA loss and VA sampling performed best with an overall sensitivity of 91% and precision of 81%. For BM in the 2.5-6 mm estimated sphere diameter range, VA loss reduced false negatives by 58% and VA sampling reduced it further by 30%. In the same range, the boundary loss achieved the highest precision at 81%, but a low sensitivity (24%) and a 31% Dice loss. DATA CONCLUSION Considering BM size in the loss and sampling function of CNN may increase the detection sensitivity regarding small BM. Our pipeline relying on a single contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI sequence could reach a detection sensitivity of 91%, with an average of only 0.66 false positives per scan. EVIDENCE LEVEL 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Daniel A Markel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Houda Bahig
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | | | - Selvan Rajakesari
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hopital Charles Lemoyne, Greenfield Park, Québec, Canada
| | | | - Simon Ducharme
- AFX Medical Inc., Montréal, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, McGill University, Montréal, Canada.,McConnell Brain Imaging Centre, Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montréal, Canada
| | - David Roberge
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|