A Multiparametric MR-Based RadioFusionOmics Model with Robust Capabilities of Differentiating Glioblastoma Multiforme from Solitary Brain Metastasis
This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic potential of a novel RFO model in differentiating GBM and SBM with multiparametric MR sequences collected from 244 (131 GBM and 113 SBM) patients. Three basic volume of interests (VOIs) were delineated on the conventional axial MR images (T<sub>1<...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Language: | EN |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doaj.org/article/d97cb2f6355240bcbc4ce6c8ed0aa331 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic potential of a novel RFO model in differentiating GBM and SBM with multiparametric MR sequences collected from 244 (131 GBM and 113 SBM) patients. Three basic volume of interests (VOIs) were delineated on the conventional axial MR images (T<sub>1</sub>WI, T<sub>2</sub>WI, T<sub>2</sub>_FLAIR, and CE_T<sub>1</sub>WI), including volumetric non-enhanced tumor (nET), enhanced tumor (ET), and peritumoral edema (pTE). Using the RFO model, radiomics features extracted from different multiparametric MRI sequence(s) and VOI(s) were fused and the best sequence and VOI, or possible combinations, were determined. A multi-disciplinary team (MDT)-like fusion was performed to integrate predictions from the high-performing models for the final discrimination of GBM vs. SBM. Image features extracted from the volumetric ET (VOI<sub>ET</sub>) had dominant predictive performances over features from other VOI combinations. Fusion of VOI<sub>ET</sub> features from the T<sub>1</sub>WI and T<sub>2</sub>_FLAIR sequences via the RFO model achieved a discrimination accuracy of AUC = 0.925, accuracy = 0.855, sensitivity = 0.856, and specificity = 0.853, on the independent testing cohort 1, and AUC = 0.859, accuracy = 0.836, sensitivity = 0.708, and specificity = 0.919 on the independent testing cohort 2, which significantly outperformed three experienced radiologists (<i>p</i> = 0.03, 0.01, 0.02, and 0.01, and <i>p</i> = 0.02, 0.01, 0.45, and 0.02, respectively) and the MDT-decision result of three experienced experts (<i>p</i> = 0.03, 0.02, 0.03, and 0.02, and <i>p</i> = 0.03, 0.02, 0.44, and 0.03, respectively). |
|---|