Deep Feature Stability Analysis Using CT Images of a Physical Phantom Across Scanner Manufacturers, Cartridges, Pixel Sizes, and Slice Thickness

Image acquisition parameters for computed tomography scans such as slice thickness and field of view may vary depending on tumor size and site. Recent studies have shown that some radiomics features were dependent on voxel size (= pixel size × slice thickness), and with proper normalization, this voxel size dependency could be reduced. Deep features from a convolutional neural network (CNN) have shown great promise in characterizing cancers. However, how do these deep features vary with changes in imaging acquisition parameters? To analyze the variability of deep features, a physical radiomics phantom with 10 different material cartridges was scanned on 8 different scanners. We assessed scans from 3 different cartridges (rubber, dense cork, and normal cork). Deep features from the penultimate layer of the CNN before (pre-rectified linear unit) and after (post-rectified linear unit) applying the rectified linear unit activation function were extracted from a pre-trained CNN using transfer learning. We studied both the interscanner and intrascanner dependency of deep features and also the deep features' dependency over the 3 cartridges. We found some deep features were dependent on pixel size and that, with appropriate normalization, this dependency could be reduced. False discovery rate was applied for multiple comparisons, to mitigate potentially optimistic results. We also used stable deep features for prognostic analysis on 1 non–small cell lung cancer data set.

[1]  Matthew B Schabath,et al.  Differences in Patient Outcomes of Prevalence, Interval, and Screen-Detected Lung Cancers in the CT Arm of the National Lung Screening Trial , 2016, PloS one.

[2]  Rob Fergus,et al.  Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks , 2013, ECCV.

[3]  W. Tsai,et al.  Exploring Variability in CT Characterization of Tumors: A Preliminary Phantom Study. , 2014, Translational oncology.

[4]  R. Barnes,et al.  Use of Mean Square Prediction Error Analysis and Reproducibility Measures to Study near Infrared Calibration Equation Performance , 1999 .

[5]  Patrick Granton,et al.  Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. , 2012, European journal of cancer.

[6]  Ying Liu,et al.  Explaining Deep Features Using Radiologist-Defined Semantic Features and Traditional Quantitative Features , 2019, Tomography.

[7]  David D. Lewis,et al.  Naive (Bayes) at Forty: The Independence Assumption in Information Retrieval , 1998, ECML.

[8]  Sebastian Thrun,et al.  Is Learning The n-th Thing Any Easier Than Learning The First? , 1995, NIPS.

[9]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Return of the Devil in the Details: Delving Deep into Convolutional Nets , 2014, BMVC.

[10]  Lawrence D. Jackel,et al.  Backpropagation Applied to Handwritten Zip Code Recognition , 1989, Neural Computation.

[11]  Geoffrey G. Zhang,et al.  Accounting for reconstruction kernel-induced variability in CT radiomic features using noise power spectra , 2017, Journal of medical imaging.

[12]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  Decision trees and decision-making , 1990, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[13]  M. Martel,et al.  High quality machine-robust image features: identification in nonsmall cell lung cancer computed tomography images. , 2013, Medical physics.

[14]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[15]  Peter Balter,et al.  Can radiomics features be reproducibly measured from CBCT images for patients with non-small cell lung cancer? , 2015, Medical physics.

[16]  Samuel H. Hawkins,et al.  Predicting malignant nodules by fusing deep features with classical radiomics features , 2018, Journal of medical imaging.

[17]  Samuel H. Hawkins,et al.  Predicting Malignant Nodules from Screening CT Scans , 2016, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[18]  Muhammad Shafiq-ul-Hassan,et al.  Stability of deep features across CT scanners and field of view using a physical phantom , 2018, Medical Imaging.

[19]  Andre Dekker,et al.  Radiomics: the process and the challenges. , 2012, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[20]  Samuel H. Hawkins,et al.  Reproducibility and Prognosis of Quantitative Features Extracted from CT Images. , 2014, Translational oncology.

[21]  Geoffrey G. Zhang,et al.  Intrinsic dependencies of CT radiomic features on voxel size and number of gray levels , 2017, Medical physics.

[22]  Peter E. Hart,et al.  Nearest neighbor pattern classification , 1967, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[23]  Jinzhong Yang,et al.  Measuring Computed Tomography Scanner Variability of Radiomics Features , 2015, Investigative radiology.

[24]  Ivan Laptev,et al.  Learning and Transferring Mid-level Image Representations Using Convolutional Neural Networks , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[25]  L. Lin,et al.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. , 1989, Biometrics.

[26]  Li Fei-Fei,et al.  ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database , 2009, CVPR.

[27]  K. Hajian‐Tilaki,et al.  Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve Analysis for Medical Diagnostic Test Evaluation. , 2013, Caspian journal of internal medicine.

[28]  R. Jeraj,et al.  Variability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters , 2010, Acta oncologica.

[29]  Samuel H. Hawkins,et al.  Deep Feature Transfer Learning in Combination with Traditional Features Predicts Survival Among Patients with Lung Adenocarcinoma , 2016, Tomography.

[30]  Huan Liu,et al.  Feature Selection for High-Dimensional Data: A Fast Correlation-Based Filter Solution , 2003, ICML.