Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Ground-Glass Opacity Nodules Using Open-Source Software for Quantifying Tumor Heterogeneity
- 1 December 2017
- journal article
- Published by American Roentgen Ray Society in American Journal of Roentgenology
- Vol. 209 (6), 1216-1227
- https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.17857
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this study are to develop quantitative imaging biomarkers obtained from high-resolution CTs for classifying ground-glass nodules (GGNs) into atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH), adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA), and invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC); to evaluate the utility of contrast enhancement for differential diagnosis; and to develop and validate a support vector machine (SVM) to predict the GGN type. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The heterogeneity of 248 GGNs was quantified using custom software. Statistical analysis with a univariate Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate metrics for significant differences among the four GGN groups. The heterogeneity metrics were used to train a SVM to learn and predict the lesion type. RESULTS. Fifty of 57 and 51 of 57 heterogeneity metrics showed statistically significant differences among the four GGN groups on unenhanced and contrast-enhanced CT scans, respectively. The SVM predicted lesion type with greater accuracy than did three expert radiologists. The accuracy of classifying the GGNs into the four groups on the basis of the SVM algorithm was 70.9%, whereas the accuracy of the radiologists was 39.6%. The accuracy of SVM in classifying the AIS and MIA nodules was 73.1%, and the accuracy of the radiologists was 35.7%. For indolent versus invasive lesions, the accuracy of the SVM was 88.1%, and the accuracy of the radiologists was 60.8%. We found that contrast enhancement does not significantly improve the differential diagnosis of GGNs. CONCLUSION. Compared with the GGN classification done by the three radiologists, the SVM trained regarding all the heterogeneity metrics showed significantly higher accuracy in classifying the lesions into the four groups, differentiating between AIS and MIA and between indolent and invasive lesions. Contrast enhancement did not improve the differential diagnosis of GGNs.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- New Pathologic Classification of Lung Cancer: Relevance for Clinical Practice and Clinical TrialsJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2013
- Screening by Chest Radiograph and Lung Cancer MortalityJAMA, 2011
- Reduced Lung-Cancer Mortality with Low-Dose Computed Tomographic ScreeningThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2011
- Paradigm shifts in lung cancer as defined in the new IASLC/ATS/ERS lung adenocarcinoma classificationEuropean Respiratory Journal, 2011
- A Prospective Radiological Study of Thin-Section Computed Tomography to Predict Pathological Noninvasiveness in Peripheral Clinical IA Lung Cancer (Japan Clinical Oncology Group 0201)Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 2011
- International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International Multidisciplinary Classification of Lung AdenocarcinomaJournal of Thoracic Oncology, 2011
- Solitary and multiple resected adenocarcinomas after CT screening for lung cancer: Histopathologic features and their prognostic implicationsLung Cancer, 2009
- Invasive Size is an Independent Predictor of Survival in Pulmonary AdenocarcinomaThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology, 2009
- Histologic features are important prognostic indicators in early stages lung adenocarcinomasLaboratory Investigation, 2007
- Results of wedge resection for focal bronchioloalveolar carcinoma showing pure ground-glass attenuation on computed tomographyThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2002