Conventional MRI radiomics in patients with suspected early- or pseudo-progression

MRI radiomics and potential applications to glioblastoma

MRI plays an important role in the evaluation of glioblastoma, both at initial diagnosis and follow up after treatment. Quantitative analysis via radiomics can augment the interpretation of MRI in terms of providing insights regarding the differential diagnosis, genotype, treatment response, and prognosis. The various MRI radiomic features of glioblastoma are reviewed in this article.

Beyond Imaging and Genetic Signature in Glioblastoma: Radiogenomic Holistic Approach in Neuro-Oncology

Glioblastoma (GBM) is a malignant brain tumor exhibiting rapid and infiltrative growth, with less than 10% of patients surviving over 5 years, despite aggressive and multimodal treatments. The poor prognosis and the lack of effective pharmacological treatments are imputable to a remarkable histological and molecular heterogeneity of GBM, which has led, to date, to the failure of precision oncology and targeted therapies. Identification of molecular biomarkers is a paradigm for comprehensive and tailored treatments; nevertheless, biopsy sampling has proved to be invasive and limited. Radiogenomics is an emerging translational field of research aiming to study the correlation between radiographic signature and underlying gene expression. Although a research field still under development, not yet incorporated into routine clinical practice, it promises to be a useful non-invasive tool for future personalized/adaptive neuro-oncology. This review provides an up-to-date summary of the recent advancements in the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiogenomics for the assessment of molecular markers of interest in GBM regarding prognosis and response to treatments, for monitoring recurrence, also providing insights into the potential efficacy of such an approach for survival prognostication. Despite a high sensitivity and specificity in almost all studies, accuracy, reproducibility and clinical value of radiomic features are the Achilles heel of this newborn tool. Looking into the future, investigators' efforts should be directed towards standardization and a disciplined approach to data collection, algorithms, and statistical analysis.

Imaging Biomarkers of Glioblastoma Treatment Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Recent Machine Learning Studies

OBJECTIVE

Monitoring biomarkers using machine learning (ML) may determine glioblastoma treatment response. We systematically reviewed quality and performance accuracy of recently published studies.

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: Diagnostic Test Accuracy, we extracted articles from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Register between 09/2018-01/2021. Included study participants were adults with glioblastoma having undergone standard treatment (maximal resection, radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide), and follow-up imaging to determine treatment response status (specifically, distinguishing progression/recurrence from progression/recurrence mimics, the target condition). Using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Two/Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging, we assessed bias risk and applicability concerns. We determined test set performance accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, precision, F1-score, balanced accuracy). We used a bivariate random-effect model to determine pooled sensitivity, specificity, area-under the receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC-AUC). Pooled measures of balanced accuracy, positive/negative likelihood ratios (PLR/NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated. PROSPERO registered (CRD42021261965).

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included (1335/384 patients for training/testing respectively). Small patient numbers, high bias risk, applicability concerns (particularly confounding in reference standard and patient selection) and low level of evidence, allow limited conclusions from studies. Ten studies (10/18, 56%) included in meta-analysis gave 0.769 (0.649-0.858) sensitivity [pooled (95% CI)]; 0.648 (0.749-0.532) specificity; 0.706 (0.623-0.779) balanced accuracy; 2.220 (1.560-3.140) PLR; 0.366 (0.213-0.572) NLR; 6.670 (2.800-13.500) DOR; 0.765 ROC-AUC.

CONCLUSION

ML models using MRI features to distinguish between progression and mimics appear to demonstrate good diagnostic performance. However, study quality and design require improvement.

Pseudoprogression in Glioblastoma: Role of Metabolic and Functional MRI-Systematic Review

Background: Glioblastoma is the most frequent malignant primitive brain tumor in adults. The treatment includes surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. During follow-up, combined chemoradiotherapy can induce treatment-related changes mimicking tumor progression on medical imaging, such as pseudoprogression (PsP). Differentiating PsP from true progression (TP) remains a challenge for radiologists and oncologists, who need to promptly start a second-line treatment in the case of TP. Advanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques such as diffusion-weighted imaging, perfusion MRI, and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging are more efficient than conventional MRI in differentiating PsP from TP. None of these techniques are fully effective, but current advances in computer science and the advent of artificial intelligence are opening up new possibilities in the imaging field with radiomics (i.e., extraction of a large number of quantitative MRI features describing tumor density, texture, and geometry). These features are used to build predictive models for diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic response. Method: Out of 7350 records for MR spectroscopy, GBM, glioma, recurrence, diffusion, perfusion, pseudoprogression, radiomics, and advanced imaging, we screened 574 papers. A total of 228 were eligible, and we analyzed 72 of them, in order to establish the role of each imaging modality and the usefulness and limitations of radiomics analysis.

Radiomics for precision medicine in glioblastoma

INTRODUCTION

Being the most common primary brain tumor, glioblastoma presents as an extremely challenging malignancy to treat with dismal outcomes despite treatment. Varying molecular epidemiology of glioblastoma between patients and intra-tumoral heterogeneity explains the failure of current one-size-fits-all treatment modalities. Radiomics uses machine learning to identify salient features of the tumor on brain imaging and promises patient-specific management in glioblastoma patients.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive review of the available literature on studies investigating the role of radiomics and radiogenomics models for the diagnosis, stratification, prognostication as well as treatment planning and monitoring of glioblastoma.

RESULTS

Classifiers based on a combination of various MRI sequences, genetic information and clinical data can predict non-invasive tumor diagnosis, overall survival and treatment response with reasonable accuracy. However, the use of radiomics for glioblastoma treatment remains in infancy as larger sample sizes, standardized image acquisition and data extraction techniques are needed to develop machine learning models that can be translated effectively into clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

Radiomics has the potential to transform the scope of glioblastoma management through personalized medicine.

Radiomics in Oncology, Part 2: Thoracic, Genito-Urinary, Breast, Neurological, Hematologic and Musculoskeletal Applications

Simple Summary

This Part II is an overview of the main applications of Radiomics in oncologic imaging with a focus on diagnosis, prognosis prediction and assessment of response to therapy in thoracic, genito-urinary, breast, neurologic, hematologic and musculoskeletal oncology. In this part II we describe the radiomic applications, limitations and future perspectives for each pre-eminent tumor. In the future, Radiomics could have a pivotal role in management of cancer patients as an imaging tool to support clinicians in decision making process. However, further investigations need to obtain some stable results and to standardize radiomic analysis (i.e., image acquisitions, segmentation and model building) in clinical routine.

Abstract

Radiomics has the potential to play a pivotal role in oncological translational imaging, particularly in cancer detection, prognosis prediction and response to therapy evaluation. To date, several studies established Radiomics as a useful tool in oncologic imaging, able to support clinicians in practicing evidence-based medicine, uniquely tailored to each patient and tumor. Mineable data, extracted from medical images could be combined with clinical and survival parameters to develop models useful for the clinicians in cancer patients’ assessment. As such, adding Radiomics to traditional subjective imaging may provide a quantitative and extensive cancer evaluation reflecting histologic architecture. In this Part II, we present an overview of radiomic applications in thoracic, genito-urinary, breast, neurological, hematologic and musculoskeletal oncologic applications.

Longitudinal structural and perfusion MRI enhanced by machine learning outperforms standalone modalities and radiological expertise in high-grade glioma surveillance

PURPOSE

Surveillance of patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) and identification of disease progression remain a major challenge in neurooncology. This study aimed to develop a support vector machine (SVM) classifier, employing combined longitudinal structural and perfusion MRI studies, to classify between stable disease, pseudoprogression and progressive disease (3-class problem).

METHODS

Study participants were separated into two groups: group I (total cohort: 64 patients) with a single DSC time point and group II (19 patients) with longitudinal DSC time points (2-3). We retrospectively analysed 269 structural MRI and 92 dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion (DSC) MRI scans. The SVM classifier was trained using all available MRI studies for each group. Classification accuracy was assessed for different feature dataset and time point combinations and compared to radiologists' classifications.

RESULTS

SVM classification based on combined perfusion and structural features outperformed radiologists' classification across all groups. For the identification of progressive disease, use of combined features and longitudinal DSC time points improved classification performance (lowest error rate 1.6%). Optimal performance was observed in group II (multiple time points) with SVM sensitivity/specificity/accuracy of 100/91.67/94.7% (first time point analysis) and 85.71/100/94.7% (longitudinal analysis), compared to 60/78/68% and 70/90/84.2% for the respective radiologist classifications. In group I (single time point), the SVM classifier also outperformed radiologists' classifications with sensitivity/specificity/accuracy of 86.49/75.00/81.53% (SVM) compared to 75.7/68.9/73.84% (radiologists).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that utilisation of a machine learning (SVM) classifier based on analysis of longitudinal perfusion time points and combined structural and perfusion features significantly enhances classification outcome (p value= 0.0001).

A systematic evaluation of learning rate policies in training CNNs for brain tumor segmentation

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have recently emerged as a powerful approach for automatic segmentation of brain tumor subregions on 3D multi-parametric MRI scans. Learning rate is a crucial hyperparameter in the training of CNNs, impacting the performance of the learned model. Different learning rate policies trace unique trajectories in the optimization landscape that converge to local minima with varying generalization properties. In this work, we empirically evaluated nine learning rate policy-optimizer pairs with two state-of-the-art architectures, namely 2D slice-based U-Net and 3D DeepMedicRes, on an augmented brain tumor dataset of 534 subjects. Segmentation performance was quantified in terms of Dice similarity coefficient and Hausdorff distance metrics. The policies were ranked based on the final ranking score (FRS) employed by the BraTS challenge, with the statistical significance of the rankings evaluated by random permutation test. For 2D slice-based U-Net architecture, an overall ranking of learning rate policies showed that the polynomial decay policy with Adam optimizer significantly outperformed other policies for the task of individual and hierarchical segmentation of tumor subregions (p< 10^-4). For 3D segment-based DeepMedicRes architecture, polynomial decay policy with Adam optimizer performed significantly better than all other policies, with the exception of polynomial decay with SGD optimizer for the same task (p< 10^-4). Based on the FRS, polynomial decay policy with Adam and SGD optimizer occupied the top two positions respectively, but the difference was not statistically significant (p> 0.3). These findings were also validated on the BraTS 2019 Validation dataset which comprised of an additional 125 subjects.

Machine learning-based radiomic evaluation of treatment response prediction in glioblastoma

AIM

To investigate machine learning based models combining clinical, radiomic, and molecular information to distinguish between early true progression (tPD) and pseudoprogression (psPD) in patients with glioblastoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was undertaken of 76 patients (46 tPD, 30 psPD) with early enhancing disease following chemoradiotherapy for glioblastoma. Outcome was determined on follow-up until 6 months post-chemoradiotherapy. Models comprised clinical characteristics, O⁶-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status, and 307 quantitative imaging features extracted from enhancing disease and perilesional oedema masks on early post-chemoradiotherapy contrast-enhanced T1-weighted imaging, T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps. Feature selection was performed within bootstrapped cross-validated recursive feature elimination with a random forest algorithm. Naive Bayes five-fold cross-validation was used to validate the final model.

RESULTS

Top selected features included age, MGMT promoter methylation status, two shape-based features from the enhancing disease mask, three radiomic features from the enhancing disease mask on ADC, and one radiomic feature from the perilesional oedema mask on T2WI. The final model had an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.80, sensitivity 78.2%, specificity 66.7%, and accuracy of 73.7%.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating a machine learning-based approach using quantitative radiomic features from standard-of-care magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in combination with clinical characteristics and MGMT promoter methylation status has a complementary effect and improves model performance for early prediction of glioblastoma treatment response.

Pseudoprogression versus true progression in glioblastoma patients: A multiapproach literature review. Part 2 - Radiological features and metric markers

After chemoradiotherapy for glioblastoma, pseudoprogression can occur and must be distinguished from true progression to correctly manage glioblastoma treatment and follow-up. Conventional treatment response assessment is evaluated via conventional MRI (contrast-enhanced T1-weighted and T2/FLAIR), which is unreliable. The emergence of advanced MRI techniques, MR spectroscopy, and PET tracers has improved pseudoprogression diagnostic accuracy. This review presents a literature review of the different imaging techniques and potential imaging biomarkers to differentiate pseudoprogression from true progression.