Prognostic models based on imaging findings in glioblastoma: Human versus Machine

Many studies have built machine-learning (ML)-based prognostic models for glioblastoma (GBM) based on radiological features. We wished to compare the predictive performance of these methods to human knowledge-based approaches. 404 GBM patients were included (311 discovery and 93 validation). 16 morphological and 28 textural descriptors were obtained from pretreatment volumetric postcontrast T1-weighted magnetic resonance images. Different prognostic ML methods were developed. An optimized linear prognostic model (OLPM) was also built using the four significant non-correlated parameters with individual prognosis value. OLPM achieved high prognostic value (validation c-index = 0.817) and outperformed ML models based on either the same parameter set or on the full set of 44 attributes considered. Neural networks with cross-validation-optimized attribute selection achieved comparable results (validation c-index = 0.825). ML models using only the four outstanding parameters obtained better results than their counterparts based on all the attributes, which presented overfitting. In conclusion, OLPM and ML methods studied here provided the most accurate survival predictors for glioblastoma to date, due to a combination of the strength of the methodology, the quality and volume of the data used and the careful attribute selection. The ML methods studied suffered overfitting and lost prognostic value when the number of parameters was increased.

[1]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Probabilistic machine learning and artificial intelligence , 2015, Nature.

[2]  Naomi S. Altman,et al.  Points of Significance: Principal component analysis , 2017, Nature Methods.

[3]  Stephen M. Moore,et al.  TCIA: An information resource to enable open science , 2013, 2013 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[4]  Devin Tian,et al.  An independently validated nomogram for individualized estimation of survival among patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: NRG Oncology RTOG 0525 and 0825 , 2016, Neuro-oncology.

[5]  Estanislao Arana,et al.  Lack of robustness of textural measures obtained from 3D brain tumor MRIs impose a need for standardization , 2017, PloS one.

[6]  Wei Luo,et al.  Guidelines for Developing and Reporting Machine Learning Predictive Models in Biomedical Research: A Multidisciplinary View , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.

[7]  Wei-Yin Loh,et al.  Classification and regression trees , 2011, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[8]  Paul Kinahan,et al.  Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data , 2015, Radiology.

[9]  Guangtao Zhai,et al.  A Deep Learning-Based Radiomics Model for Prediction of Survival in Glioblastoma Multiforme , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[10]  Kenneth Hess,et al.  The influence of maximum safe resection of glioblastoma on survival in 1229 patients: Can we do better than gross-total resection? , 2016, Journal of neurosurgery.

[11]  M. S. Ali,et al.  Artificial Intelligence in Medical Diagnosis , 2012 .

[12]  Martin Sill,et al.  Radiogenomics of Glioblastoma: Machine Learning-based Classification of Molecular Characteristics by Using Multiparametric and Multiregional MR Imaging Features. , 2016, Radiology.

[13]  Z L Gokaslan,et al.  A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survival. , 2001, Journal of neurosurgery.

[14]  Lei Xing,et al.  Prognostic Imaging Biomarkers in Glioblastoma: Development and Independent Validation on the Basis of Multiregion and Quantitative Analysis of MR Images. , 2016, Radiology.

[15]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Textural Features for Image Classification , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[16]  Maximilian Reiser,et al.  Radiomic Analysis Reveals Prognostic Information in T1-Weighted Baseline Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Glioblastoma , 2017, Investigative radiology.

[17]  Mary M. Galloway,et al.  Texture analysis using gray level run lengths , 1974 .

[18]  Robert Koprowski,et al.  Machine learning, medical diagnosis, and biomedical engineering research - commentary , 2014, BioMedical Engineering OnLine.

[19]  Jacob D. Furst,et al.  RUN-LENGTH ENCODING FOR VOLUMETRIC TEXTURE , 2004 .

[20]  Rivka R Colen,et al.  Imaging Genomics in Gliomas. , 2015, Cancer journal.

[21]  David A Jaffray,et al.  Editorial: Radiomics: The New World or Another Road to El Dorado? , 2017, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[22]  A Gregory Sorensen,et al.  Emerging techniques and technologies in brain tumor imaging. , 2014, Neuro-oncology.

[23]  Peter Szolovits,et al.  Artificial intelligence in medical diagnosis. , 1988, Annals of internal medicine.

[24]  Gilles Louppe,et al.  Understanding variable importances in forests of randomized trees , 2013, NIPS.

[25]  Juan J. Martinez,et al.  Evaluation of tumor-derived MRI-texture features for discrimination of molecular subtypes and prediction of 12-month survival status in glioblastoma. , 2015, Medical physics.

[26]  Ruijiang Li,et al.  Volume of high-risk intratumoral subregions at multi-parametric MR imaging predicts overall survival and complements molecular analysis of glioblastoma , 2017, European Radiology.

[27]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

[28]  Estanislao Arana,et al.  Morphological MRI-based features provide pretreatment survival prediction in glioblastoma , 2018, European Radiology.

[29]  Max Wintermark,et al.  Multicenter imaging outcomes study of The Cancer Genome Atlas glioblastoma patient cohort: imaging predictors of overall and progression-free survival. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[30]  Christopher Nimsky,et al.  Correlation of the extent of tumor volume resection and patient survival in surgery of glioblastoma multiforme with high-field intraoperative MRI guidance. , 2011, Neuro-oncology.

[31]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects , 2015, Science.

[32]  Gloria Bueno,et al.  Textural features and SUV-based variables assessed by dual time point 18F-FDG PET/CT in locally advanced breast cancer , 2017, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.

[33]  Estanislao Arana,et al.  Glioblastoma: does the pre-treatment geometry matter? A postcontrast T1 MRI-based study , 2017, European Radiology.

[34]  Estanislao Arana,et al.  Influence of gray level and space discretization on brain tumor heterogeneity measures obtained from magnetic resonance images , 2016, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[35]  F. Cendes,et al.  Texture analysis of medical images. , 2004, Clinical radiology.

[36]  F. Harrell,et al.  Evaluating the yield of medical tests. , 1982, JAMA.

[37]  Arvind Rao,et al.  Radiomics in glioblastoma: current status, challenges and potential opportunities , 2016 .

[38]  Tomaso A. Poggio,et al.  Regularization Theory and Neural Networks Architectures , 1995, Neural Computation.

[39]  Juan Belmonte-Beitia,et al.  Bright solitary waves in malignant gliomas. , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[40]  Benjamin Recht,et al.  Random Features for Large-Scale Kernel Machines , 2007, NIPS.

[41]  Benjamin M. Ellingson,et al.  Radiogenomics and Imaging Phenotypes in Glioblastoma: Novel Observations and Correlation with Molecular Characteristics , 2014, Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports.

[42]  David J. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Machine Learning, Neural and Statistical Classification , 2009 .

[43]  Estanislao Arana,et al.  Tumor Surface Regularity at MR Imaging Predicts Survival and Response to Surgery in Patients with Glioblastoma. , 2018, Radiology.