Deep-learned time-signal intensity pattern analysis using an autoencoder captures magnetic resonance perfusion heterogeneity for brain tumor differentiation

Current image processing methods for dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) do not capture complex dynamic information of time-signal intensity curves. We investigated whether an autoencoder-based pattern analysis of DSC MRI captured representative temporal features that improves tissue characterization and tumor diagnosis in a multicenter setting. The autoencoder was applied to the time-signal intensity curves to obtain representative temporal patterns, which were subsequently learned by a convolutional neural network. This network was trained with 216 preoperative DSC MRI acquisitions and validated using external data (n = 43) collected with different DSC acquisition protocols. The autoencoder applied to time-signal intensity curves and clustering obtained nine representative clusters of temporal patterns, which accurately identified tumor and non-tumoral tissues. The dominant clusters of temporal patterns distinguished primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) from glioblastoma (AUC 0.89) and metastasis from glioblastoma (AUC 0.95). The autoencoder captured DSC time-signal intensity patterns that improved identification of tumoral tissues and differentiation of tumor type and was generalizable across centers.

[1]  H R Jäger,et al.  Glioma imaging in Europe: A survey of 220 centres and recommendations for best clinical practice , 2018, European Radiology.

[2]  R. Frayne,et al.  Signal‐to‐noise ratio effects in quantitative cerebral perfusion using dynamic susceptibility contrast agents , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  J. Boxerman,et al.  Optimization of Acquisition and Analysis Methods for Clinical Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MRI Using a Population-Based Digital Reference Object , 2018, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[4]  S. Kralik,et al.  Contrast Leakage Patterns from Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion MRI in the Grading of Primary Pediatric Brain Tumors , 2016, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[5]  A Gregory Sorensen,et al.  Dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI measures of relative cerebral blood volume as a prognostic marker for overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma: results from the ACRIN 6677/RTOG 0625 multicenter trial. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[6]  Shing-Tung Yau,et al.  Geometric Understanding of Deep Learning , 2018, ArXiv.

[7]  Toshiaki Taoka,et al.  Application of histogram analysis for the evaluation of vascular permeability in glioma by the K2 parameter obtained with the dynamic susceptibility contrast method: Comparisons with Ktrans obtained with the dynamic contrast enhance method and cerebral blood volume. , 2016, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[8]  E. Neuwelt,et al.  Distinguishing primary central nervous system lymphoma from other central nervous system diseases: a neurosurgical perspective on diagnostic dilemmas and approaches. , 2006, Neurosurgical focus.

[9]  Klaus H. Maier-Hein,et al.  The Medical Imaging Interaction Toolkit: challenges and advances , 2013, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[10]  E F Halpern,et al.  Cerebral blood volume maps of gliomas: comparison with tumor grade and histologic findings. , 1994, Radiology.

[11]  J. Titano,et al.  Machine learning for semi-automated classification of glioblastoma, brain metastasis and central nervous system lymphoma using magnetic resonance advanced imaging. , 2019, Annals of translational medicine.

[12]  S. Park,et al.  Methodologic Guide for Evaluating Clinical Performance and Effect of Artificial Intelligence Technology for Medical Diagnosis and Prediction. , 2018, Radiology.

[13]  M. Delgado-Rodríguez,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2017, Medicina intensiva.

[14]  J. Boxerman,et al.  Quantitative Delta T1 (dT1) as a Replacement for Adjudicated Central Reader Analysis of Contrast-Enhancing Tumor Burden: A Subanalysis of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6677/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0625 Multicenter Brain Tumor Trial , 2019, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[15]  Bainan Xu,et al.  The performance of MR perfusion-weighted imaging for the differentiation of high-grade glioma from primary central nervous system lymphoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2017, PloS one.

[16]  K. Schmainda,et al.  Comparison of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR methods: recommendations for measuring relative cerebral blood volume in brain tumors. , 2008, Radiology.

[17]  T. Cloughesy,et al.  NIMG-24HIGH SPATIOTEMPORAL DYNAMIC SUSCEPTIBILITY CONTRAST (DSC) PERFUSION MRI USING MULTIBAND ECHOPLANAR IMAGING (MB-EPI) , 2015 .

[18]  Bradley J. Erickson,et al.  Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast-MRI Quantification Software Tool: Development and Evaluation , 2016, Tomography.

[19]  B. Jeong,et al.  Prediction of IDH genotype in gliomas with dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging using an explainable recurrent neural network. , 2019, Neuro-oncology.

[20]  Vijayan N. Nair,et al.  A REVIEW AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS , 2005 .

[21]  Jorge Cadima,et al.  Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[22]  R M Weisskoff,et al.  Relative cerebral blood volume maps corrected for contrast agent extravasation significantly correlate with glioma tumor grade, whereas uncorrected maps do not. , 2006, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[23]  Marion Smits,et al.  Consensus recommendations for a standardized Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol in clinical trials. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[24]  Luke Macyszyn,et al.  Pattern analysis of dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging demonstrates peritumoral tissue heterogeneity. , 2014, Radiology.

[25]  J. Boxerman,et al.  Utility of Percentage Signal Recovery and Baseline Signal in DSC-MRI Optimized for Relative CBV Measurement for Differentiating Glioblastoma, Lymphoma, Metastasis, and Meningioma , 2019, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[26]  Y. Sung,et al.  Detection of Local Recurrence in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Using Voxel-Based Color Maps of Initial and Final Area under the Curve Values Derived from DCE-MRI , 2019, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[27]  J. Boxerman,et al.  The Effect of Pulse Sequence Parameters and Contrast Agent Dose on Percentage Signal Recovery in DSC-MRI: Implications for Clinical Applications , 2013, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[28]  Marc'Aurelio Ranzato,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Invariant Feature Hierarchies with Applications to Object Recognition , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[29]  Namkug Kim,et al.  Radiomic features and multilayer perceptron network classifier: a robust MRI classification strategy for distinguishing glioblastoma from primary central nervous system lymphoma , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[30]  J. Boxerman,et al.  Effects of MRI Protocol Parameters, Preload Injection Dose, Fractionation Strategies, and Leakage Correction Algorithms on the Fidelity of Dynamic-Susceptibility Contrast MRI Estimates of Relative Cerebral Blood Volume in Gliomas , 2017, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[31]  Paolo Vitali,et al.  Brain Gliomas: Multicenter Standardized Assessment of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced and Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MR Images. , 2018, Radiology.

[32]  J. Boxerman,et al.  Moving Toward a Consensus DSC-MRI Protocol: Validation of a Low–Flip Angle Single-Dose Option as a Reference Standard for Brain Tumors , 2019, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[33]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  In Vivo Detection of EGFRvIII in Glioblastoma via Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging Signature Consistent with Deep Peritumoral Infiltration: The ϕ-Index , 2017, Clinical Cancer Research.

[34]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Reducing the Dimensionality of Data with Neural Networks , 2006, Science.

[35]  A. Bjørnerud,et al.  Clinical Value of Vascular Permeability Estimates Using Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MRI: Improved Diagnostic Performance in Distinguishing Hypervascular Primary CNS Lymphoma from Glioblastoma , 2018, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[36]  G. Parker,et al.  Imaging Intratumor Heterogeneity: Role in Therapy Response, Resistance, and Clinical Outcome , 2014, Clinical Cancer Research.

[37]  A. Espeland,et al.  Central Nervous System Lymphoma: Characteristic Findings on Traditional and Advanced Imaging , 2011, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[38]  Bradley J Erickson,et al.  Variability and accuracy of different software packages for dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing glioblastoma progression from pseudoprogression , 2015, Journal of medical imaging.

[39]  M. Berger,et al.  Differentiation of Glioblastoma Multiforme and Single Brain Metastasis by Peak Height and Percentage of Signal Intensity Recovery Derived from Dynamic Susceptibility-Weighted Contrast-Enhanced Perfusion MR Imaging , 2007, American Journal of Neuroradiology.