The use of radiomics and machine learning for the differentiation of chondrosarcoma from enchondroma

被引:5
作者
Erdem, Fatih [1 ]
Tamsel, Ipek [2 ]
Demirpolat, Gulen [1 ]
机构
[1] Balikesir Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, TR-10145 Balikesir, Turkiye
[2] Ege Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, TR-35100 Izmir, Turkiye
关键词
chondrosarcoma; enchondroma; machine learning; magnetic resonance imaging; radiomics; HEALTH-ORGANIZATION CLASSIFICATION; LOW-GRADE CHONDROSARCOMA; SOFT-TISSUE; SARCOMA CLASSIFICATION; TUMORS; BONE; DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1002/jcu.23461
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Purpose: To construct and compare machine learning models for differentiating chondrosarcoma from enchondroma using radiomic features from T1 and fat suppressed Proton density (PD) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods: Eighty-eight patients (57 with enchondroma, 31 with chondrosarcoma) were retrospectively included. Histogram matching and N4ITK MRI bias correction filters were applied. An experienced musculoskeletal radiologist and a senior resident in radiology performed manual segmentation. Voxel sizes were resampled. Laplacian of Gaussian filter and wavelet-based features were used. One thousand eight hundred eighty-eight features were obtained for each patient, with 944 from T1 and 944 from PD images. Sixty-four unstable features were removed. Seven machine learning models were used for classification. Results: Classification with all features showed neural network was the best model for both readers' datasets with area under the curve (AUC), classification accuracy (CA), and F1 score of 0.979, 0.984; 0.920, 0.932; and 0.889, 0.903, respectively. Four features, including one common to both readers, were selected using fast correlation based filter. The best performing models with selected features were gradient boosting for Fatih Erdem's dataset and neural network for Gulen Demirpolat's dataset with AUC, CA, and F1 score of 0.990, 0.979; 0.943, 0.955; 0.921, 0.933, respectively. Neural Network was the second-best model for FE's dataset based on AUC (0.984). Conclusion: Using pathology as a gold standard, this study defined and compared seven well-performing models to distinguish enchondromas from chondrosarcomas and provided radiomic feature stability and reproducibility among the readers.
引用
收藏
页码:1027 / 1035
页数:9
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Secondary chondrosarcoma in cartilage bone tumors: report of 32 patients
    Altay, Murat
    Bayrakci, Kenan
    Yildiz, Yusuf
    Erekul, Selim
    Saglik, Yener
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SCIENCE, 2007, 12 (05) : 415 - 423
  • [2] Benign and malignant cartilage tumors of bone and joint: Their anatomic and theoretical basis with an emphasis on radiology, pathology and clinical biology .1. The intramedullary cartilage tumors
    Brien, EW
    Mirra, JM
    Kerr, R
    [J]. SKELETAL RADIOLOGY, 1997, 26 (06) : 325 - 353
  • [3] Bone sarcomas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
    Casali, Paolo G.
    Blay, Jean-Yves
    Bertuzzi, Alexia
    Bielack, Stefan
    Bjerkehagen, Bodil
    Bonvalot, Sylvie
    Boukovinas, Ioannis
    Bruzzi, Paolo
    Dei Tos, Angelo Paolo
    Dileo, Palma
    Eriksson, Mikael
    Fedenko, Alexander
    Ferrari, Andrea
    Ferrari, Stefano
    Gelderblom, Hans
    Grimer, Robert
    Gronchi, Alessandro
    Haas, Rick
    Hall, Kirsten Sundby
    Hohenberger, Peter
    Issels, Rolf
    Joensuu, Heikki
    Judson, Ian
    Le Cesne, Axel
    Litiere, Saskia
    Martin-Broto, Javier
    Merimsky, Ofer
    Montemurro, Michael
    Morosi, Carlo
    Picci, Piero
    Ray-Coquard, Isabelle
    Reichardt, Peter
    Rutkowski, Piotr
    Schlemmer, Marcus
    Stacchiotti, Silvia
    Torri, Valter
    Trama, Annalisa
    Van Coevorden, Frits
    Van der Graaf, Winette
    Vanel, Daniel
    Wardelmann, Eva
    [J]. ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2014, 25 : 113 - 123
  • [4] Role of texture analysis in breast MRI as a cancer biomarker: A review
    Chitalia, Rhea D.
    Kontos, Despina
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2019, 49 (04) : 927 - 938
  • [5] Can imaging criteria distinguish enchondroma from grade 1 chondrosarcoma?
    Crim, Julia
    Schmidt, Robert
    Layfield, Lester
    Hanrahan, Christopher
    Manaster, Betty Jean
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2015, 84 (11) : 2222 - 2230
  • [6] Demsar J, 2013, J MACH LEARN RES, V14, P2349
  • [7] The imaging of cartilaginous bone tumours. II. Chondrosarcoma
    Douis, H.
    Saifuddin, A.
    [J]. SKELETAL RADIOLOGY, 2013, 42 (05) : 611 - 626
  • [8] Sarcoma Classification: An Update Based on the 2013 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of Soft Tissue and Bone
    Doyle, Leona A.
    [J]. CANCER, 2014, 120 (12) : 1763 - 1774
  • [9] 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network
    Fedorov, Andriy
    Beichel, Reinhard
    Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree
    Finet, Julien
    Fillion-Robin, Jean-Christophe
    Pujol, Sonia
    Bauer, Christian
    Jennings, Dominique
    Fennessy, Fiona
    Sonka, Milan
    Buatti, John
    Aylward, Stephen
    Miller, James V.
    Pieper, Steve
    Kikinis, Ron
    [J]. MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2012, 30 (09) : 1323 - 1341
  • [10] Flemming D J, 2000, Semin Musculoskelet Radiol, V4, P59, DOI 10.1055/s-2000-6855