skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-E-J-245: Sensitivity of FDG PET Feature Analysis in Multi-Plane Vs. Single-Plane Extraction

Abstract

Purpose: Sensitivity of PET-derived texture features to reconstruction methods has been reported for features extracted from axial planes; however, studies often utilize three dimensional techniques. This work aims to quantify the impact of multi-plane (3D) vs. single-plane (2D) feature extraction on radiomics-based analysis, including sensitivity to reconstruction parameters and potential loss of spatial information. Methods: Twenty-three patients with solid tumors underwent [{sup 18}F]FDG PET/CT scans under identical protocols. PET data were reconstructed using five sets of reconstruction parameters. Tumors were segmented using an automatic, in-house algorithm robust to reconstruction variations. 50 texture features were extracted using two Methods: 2D patches along axial planes and 3D patches. For each method, sensitivity of features to reconstruction parameters was calculated as percent difference relative to the average value across reconstructions. Correlations between feature values were compared when using 2D and 3D extraction. Results: 21/50 features showed significantly different sensitivity to reconstruction parameters when extracted in 2D vs 3D (wilcoxon α<0.05), assessed by overall range of variation, Rangevar(%). Eleven showed greater sensitivity to reconstruction in 2D extraction, primarily first-order and co-occurrence features (average Rangevar increase 83%). The remaining ten showed higher variation in 3D extraction (average Range{sub var}increase 27%), mainly co-occurence and greylevel run-lengthmore » features. Correlation of feature value extracted in 2D and feature value extracted in 3D was poor (R<0.5) in 12/50 features, including eight co-occurrence features. Feature-to-feature correlations in 2D were marginally higher than 3D, ∣R∣>0.8 in 16% and 13% of all feature combinations, respectively. Larger sensitivity to reconstruction parameters were seen for inter-feature correlation in 2D(σ=6%) than 3D (σ<1%) extraction. Conclusion: Sensitivity and correlation of various texture features were shown to significantly differ between 2D and 3D extraction. Additionally, inter-feature correlations were more sensitive to reconstruction variation using single-plane extraction. This work highlights a need for standardized feature extraction/selection techniques in radiomics.« less

Authors:
;  [1];  [1];  [2]
  1. University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI (United States)
  2. (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22499347
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; ALGORITHMS; FLUORINE 18; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY

Citation Formats

Harmon, S, Jeraj, R, Galavis, P, and NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY. SU-E-J-245: Sensitivity of FDG PET Feature Analysis in Multi-Plane Vs. Single-Plane Extraction. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924331.
Harmon, S, Jeraj, R, Galavis, P, & NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY. SU-E-J-245: Sensitivity of FDG PET Feature Analysis in Multi-Plane Vs. Single-Plane Extraction. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924331.
Harmon, S, Jeraj, R, Galavis, P, and NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY. Mon . "SU-E-J-245: Sensitivity of FDG PET Feature Analysis in Multi-Plane Vs. Single-Plane Extraction". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924331.
@article{osti_22499347,
title = {SU-E-J-245: Sensitivity of FDG PET Feature Analysis in Multi-Plane Vs. Single-Plane Extraction},
author = {Harmon, S and Jeraj, R and Galavis, P and NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Sensitivity of PET-derived texture features to reconstruction methods has been reported for features extracted from axial planes; however, studies often utilize three dimensional techniques. This work aims to quantify the impact of multi-plane (3D) vs. single-plane (2D) feature extraction on radiomics-based analysis, including sensitivity to reconstruction parameters and potential loss of spatial information. Methods: Twenty-three patients with solid tumors underwent [{sup 18}F]FDG PET/CT scans under identical protocols. PET data were reconstructed using five sets of reconstruction parameters. Tumors were segmented using an automatic, in-house algorithm robust to reconstruction variations. 50 texture features were extracted using two Methods: 2D patches along axial planes and 3D patches. For each method, sensitivity of features to reconstruction parameters was calculated as percent difference relative to the average value across reconstructions. Correlations between feature values were compared when using 2D and 3D extraction. Results: 21/50 features showed significantly different sensitivity to reconstruction parameters when extracted in 2D vs 3D (wilcoxon α<0.05), assessed by overall range of variation, Rangevar(%). Eleven showed greater sensitivity to reconstruction in 2D extraction, primarily first-order and co-occurrence features (average Rangevar increase 83%). The remaining ten showed higher variation in 3D extraction (average Range{sub var}increase 27%), mainly co-occurence and greylevel run-length features. Correlation of feature value extracted in 2D and feature value extracted in 3D was poor (R<0.5) in 12/50 features, including eight co-occurrence features. Feature-to-feature correlations in 2D were marginally higher than 3D, ∣R∣>0.8 in 16% and 13% of all feature combinations, respectively. Larger sensitivity to reconstruction parameters were seen for inter-feature correlation in 2D(σ=6%) than 3D (σ<1%) extraction. Conclusion: Sensitivity and correlation of various texture features were shown to significantly differ between 2D and 3D extraction. Additionally, inter-feature correlations were more sensitive to reconstruction variation using single-plane extraction. This work highlights a need for standardized feature extraction/selection techniques in radiomics.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924331},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
  • Purpose: To identify PET/CT based imaging predictors of anal cancer recurrence and evaluate baseline vs. mid-treatment vs. post-treatment PET/CT scans in the tumor recurrence prediction. Methods: FDG-PET/CT scans were obtained at baseline, during chemoradiotherapy (CRT, midtreatment), and after CRT (post-treatment) in 17 patients of anal cancer. Four patients had tumor recurrence. For each patient, the mid-treatment and post-treatment scans were respectively aligned to the baseline scan by a rigid registration followed by a deformable registration. PET/CT image features were computed within the manually delineated tumor volume of each scan to characterize the intensity histogram, spatial patterns (texture), and shape ofmore » the tumors, as well as the changes of these features resulting from CRT. A total of 335 image features were extracted. An Exact Logistic Regression model was employed to analyze these PET/CT image features in order to identify potential predictors for tumor recurrence. Results: Eleven potential predictors of cancer recurrence were identified with p < 0.10, including five shape features, five statistical texture features, and one CT intensity histogram feature. Six features were indentified from posttreatment scans, 3 from mid-treatment scans, and 2 from baseline scans. These features indicated that there were differences in shape, intensity, and spatial pattern between tumors with and without recurrence. Recurrent tumors tended to have more compact shape (higher roundness and lower elongation) and larger intensity difference between baseline and follow-up scans, compared to non-recurrent tumors. Conclusion: PET/CT based anal cancer recurrence predictors were identified. The post-CRT PET/CT is the most important scan for the prediction of cancer recurrence. The baseline and mid-CRT PET/CT also showed value in the prediction and would be more useful for the predication of tumor recurrence in early stage of CRT. This work was supported in part by the National Cancer Institute Grant R01CA172638.« less
  • Purpose: To compare PET extracted metrics and investigate the role of a gradient-based PET segmentation tool, PET Edge (MIM Software Inc., Cleveland, OH), in the context of an adaptive PET protocol for node positive gynecologic cancer patients. Methods: An IRB approved protocol enrolled women with gynecological, PET visible malignancies. A PET-CT was obtained for treatment planning prescribed to 45–50.4Gy with a 55– 70Gy boost to the PET positive nodes. An intra-treatment PET-CT was obtained between 30–36Gy, and all volumes re-contoured. Standard uptake values (SUVmax, SUVmean, SUVmedian) and GTV volumes were extracted from the clinician contoured GTVs on the pre- andmore » intra-treament PET-CT for primaries and nodes and compared with a two tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The differences between primary and node GTV volumes contoured in the treatment planning system and those volumes generated using PET Edge were also investigated. Bland-Altman plots were used to describe significant differences between the two contouring methods. Results: Thirteen women were enrolled in this study. The median baseline/intra-treatment primary (SUVmax, mean, median) were (30.5, 9.09, 7.83)/( 16.6, 4.35, 3.74), and nodes were (20.1, 4.64, 3.93)/( 6.78, 3.13, 3.26). The p values were all < 0.001. The clinical contours were all larger than the PET Edge generated ones, with mean difference of +20.6 ml for primary, and +23.5 ml for nodes. The Bland-Altman revealed changes between clinician/PET Edge contours to be mostly within the margins of the coefficient of variability. However, there was a proportional trend, i.e. the larger the GTV, the larger the clinical contours as compared to PET Edge contours. Conclusion: Primary and node SUV values taken from the intratreament PET-CT can be used to assess the disease response and to design an adaptive plan. The PET Edge tool can streamline the contouring process and lead to smaller, less user-dependent contours.« less
  • Purpose: We propose a method to examine gynecological tumor heterogeneity using texture analysis in the context of an adaptive PET protocol in order to establish if texture metrics from baseline PET-CT predict tumor response better than SUV metrics alone as well as determine texture features correlating with tumor response during radiation therapy. Methods: This IRB approved protocol included 29 women with node positive gynecological cancers visible on FDG-PET treated with EBRT to the PET positive nodes. A baseline and intra-treatment PET-CT was obtained. Tumor outcome was determined based on RECIST on posttreatment PET-CT. Primary GTVs were segmented using 40% thresholdmore » and a semi-automatic gradient-based contouring tool, PET Edge (MIM Software Inc., Cleveland, OH). SUV histogram features, Metabolic Volume (MV), and Total Lesion Glycolysis (TLG) were calculated. Four 3D texture matrices describing local and regional relationships between voxel intensities in the GTV were generated: co-occurrence, run length, size zone, and neighborhood difference. From these, 39 texture features were calculated. Prognostic power of baseline features derived from gradientbased and threshold GTVs were determined using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Receiver Operating Characteristics and logistic regression was performed using JMP (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) to find probabilities of predicting response. Changes in features during treatment were determined using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: Of the 29 patients, there were 16 complete responders, 7 partial responders, and 6 non-responders. Comparing CR/PR vs. NR for gradient-based GTVs, 7 texture values, TLG, and SUV kurtosis had a p < 0.05. Threshold GTVs yielded 4 texture features and TLG with p < 0.05. From baseline to intra-treatment, 14 texture features, SUVmean, SUVmax, MV, and TLG changed with p < 0.05. Conclusion: Texture analysis of PET imaged gynecological tumors is an effective method for early prognosis and should be used complimentary to SUV metrics, especially when using gradient based segmentation.« less
  • Purpose: This study examines the effect on texture analysis due to variable reconstruction of PET images in the context of an adaptive FDG PET protocol for node positive gynecologic cancer patients. By measuring variability in texture features from baseline and intra-treatment PET-CT, we can isolate unreliable texture features due to large variation. Methods: A subset of seven patients with node positive gynecological cancers visible on PET was selected for this study. Prescribed dose varied between 45–50.4Gy, with a 55–70Gy boost to the PET positive nodes. A baseline and intratreatment (between 30–36Gy) PET-CT were obtained on a Siemens Biograph mCT. Eachmore » clinical PET image set was reconstructed 6 times using a TrueX+TOF algorithm with varying iterations and Gaussian filter. Baseline and intra-treatment primary GTVs were segmented using PET Edge (MIM Software Inc., Cleveland, OH), a semi-automatic gradient-based algorithm, on the clinical PET and transferred to the other reconstructed sets. Using an in-house MATLAB program, four 3D texture matrices describing relationships between voxel intensities in the GTV were generated: co-occurrence, run length, size zone, and neighborhood difference. From these, 39 textural features characterizing texture were calculated in addition to SUV histogram features. The percent variability among parameters was first calculated. Each reconstructed texture feature from baseline and intra-treatment per patient was normalized to the clinical baseline scan and compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test in order to isolate variations due to reconstruction parameters. Results: For the baseline scans, 13 texture features showed a mean range greater than 10%. For the intra scans, 28 texture features showed a mean range greater than 10%. Comparing baseline to intra scans, 25 texture features showed p <0.05. Conclusion: Variability due to different reconstruction parameters increased with treatment, however, the majority of texture features showed significant changes during treatment independent of reconstruction effects.« less
  • Purpose: To investigate spatial correlation between high uptake regions of pre- and 10-days-post therapy{sup 1} {sup 8}F-FDG PET in recurrent lung cancer and to evaluate the feasibility of dose escalation boosting only regions with high FDG uptake identified on baseline PET. Methods: Nineteen patients with stages II– IV inoperable lung cancer were selected. Volumes of interest (VOI) on pre-therapy FDG-PET were defined using an isocontour at ≥50% of SUVmax. VOI of pre- and post-therapy PET images were correlated for the extent of overlap. A highly optimized IMRT plan to 60 Gy prescribed to PTV defined on the planning CT wasmore » designed using clinical dose constraints for the organs at risk. A boost of 18 Gy was prescribed to the VOI defined on baseline PET. A composite plan of the total 78 Gy was compared with the base 60 Gy plan. Increases in dose to the lungs, spinal cord and heart were evaluated. IMRT boost plan was compared with proton RT and SBRT boost plans. Results: Overlap fraction of baseline PET VOI with the VOI on 10 days-post therapy PET was 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7 – 0.9). Using baseline VOI as a boosting volume, dose could be escalated to 78 Gy for 15 patients without compromising the dose constraints. For 4 patients, the dose limiting factors were V20Gy and Dmean for the total lung, and Dmax for the spinal cord. An increase of the dose to OARs correlated significantly with the relative size of the boost volume. Conclusion: VOI defined on baseline 18F-FDG PET by the SUVmax-≥50% isocontour may be a biological target volume for escalated radiation dose. Dose escalation to this volume may provide improved tumor control without breaching predefined dose constraints for OARs. The best treatment outcome may be achieved with proton RT for large targets and with SBRT for small targets.« less