Prediction of disease-free survival by the PET/CT radiomic signature in non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing surgery

Abstract

Purpose

Radiomic features derived from the texture analysis of different imaging modalities e show promise in lesion characterisation, response prediction, and prognostication in lung cancer patients. The present study aimed to identify an images-based radiomic signature capable of predicting disease-free survival (DFS) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients undergoing surgery.

Methods

A cohort of 295 patients was selected. Clinical parameters (age, sex, histological type, tumour grade, and stage) were recorded for all patients. The endpoint of this study was DFS. Both computed tomography (CT) and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) images generated from the PET/CT scanner were analysed. Textural features were calculated using the LifeX package. Statistical analysis was performed using the R platform. The datasets were separated into two cohorts by random selection to perform training and validation of the statistical models. Predictors were fed into a multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve as well as the corresponding area under the curve (AUC) were computed for each model built.

Results

The Cox models that included radiomic features for the CT, the PET, and the PET+CT images resulted in an AUC of 0.75 (95%CI: 0.65–0.85), 0.68 (95%CI: 0.57–0.80), and 0.68 (95%CI: 0.58–0.74), respectively. The addition of clinical predictors to the Cox models resulted in an AUC of 0.61 (95%CI: 0.51–0.69), 0.64 (95%CI: 0.53–0.75), and 0.65 (95%CI: 0.50–0.72) for the CT, the PET, and the PET+CT images, respectively.

Conclusions

A radiomic signature, for either CT, PET, or PET/CT images, has been identified and validated for the prediction of disease-free survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated by surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    EUCAN | Home page [Internet]. Available from: http://eco.iarc.fr/EUCAN/Default.aspx.

  2. 2.

    Molina JR, Yang P, Cassivi SD, Schild SE, Adjei AA. Non-small cell lung cancer: epidemiology, risk factors, treatment, and survivorship. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:584–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Vansteenkiste J, Crino L, Dooms C, Douillard JY, Faivre-Finn C, Lim E, et al. 2nd ESMO consensus conference on lung cancer: early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer consensus on diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:1462–74.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Zhang M, Zhang Z, Garmestani K, Schultz J, Axworthy DB, Goldman CK, et al. Pretarget radiotherapy with an anti-CD25 antibody-streptavidin fusion protein was effective in therapy of leukemia/lymphoma xenografts. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:1891–5.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Detterbeck FC, Boffa DJ, Kim AW, Tanoue LT. The eighth edition lung cancer stage classification. Chest. 2017;151:193–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Ost D, Goldberg J, Rolnitzky L, Rom WN. Survival after surgery in stage IA and IB non-small cell lung cancer. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177:516–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, Carvalho S, Van Stiphout RGPM, Granton P, et al. Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:441–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Sollini M, Cozzi L, Antunovic L, Chiti A, Kirienko M. PET Radiomics in NSCLC: state of the art and a proposal for harmonization of methodology. Sci Rep. 2017;7:358.

  9. 9.

    Bashir U, Siddique MM, Mclean E, Goh V, Cook GJ. Imaging heterogeneity in lung cancer: techniques, applications, and challenges. Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207:534–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Chalkidou A, O’Doherty MJ, Marsden PK. False discovery rates in PET and CT studies with texture features: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10:1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Rami-Porta R, Crowley J, Goldstraw P. The revised TNM staging system for lung cancer. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;15:4–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJG, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;42:328–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Orlhac F, Nioche C, Buvat I. Technical Appendix — Local Image Features Extraction — — LIFEx —. 2016.

  14. 14.

    Buvat I, Orlhac F, Soussan M. Tumor texture analysis in PET: where do we stand? J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1642–4.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Uramoto H, Tanaka F. Recurrence after surgery in patients with NSCLC. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2014;3:242–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Hellmann MD, Chaft JE, William WN, Rusch V, Pisters KMW, Kalhor N, et al. Pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable non-small-cell lung cancers: proposal for the use of major pathological response as a surrogate endpoint. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Velez-Cubian FO, Rodriguez KL, Thau MR, Moodie CC, Garrett JR, Fontaine JP, et al. Efficacy of lymph node dissection during robotic-assisted lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: retrospective review of 159 consecutive cases. J Thorac Dis. 2016;8:2454–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Korasidis S, Menna C, Andreetti C, Maurizi G, D’Andrilli A, Ciccone AM, et al. Lymph node dissection after pulmonary resection for lung cancer: a mini review. Ann Transl Med. 2016;4:368.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Brundage MD. Prognostic factors in non-small cell lung cancer: a decade of progress. Chest. 2002;122:1037–57.

  20. 20.

    Parekh V, Jacobs MA. Radiomics: a new application from established techniques. Expert Rev Precis Med Drug Dev. 2016;1:207–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Kim D-H, Jung J, Son SH, Kim C-Y, Hong CM, Oh J-R, et al. Prognostic significance of intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity on 18F-FDG PET/CT in pathological N0 non–small cell lung cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40:708–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Tixier F, Hatt M, Valla C, Fleury V, Lamour C, Ezzouhri S, et al. Visual versus quantitative assessment of intratumor 18F-FDG PET uptake heterogeneity: prognostic value in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1235–41.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Apostolova I, Rogasch J, Buchert R, Wertzel H, Achenbach HJ, Schreiber J, et al. Quantitative assessment of the asphericity of pretherapeutic FDG uptake as an independent predictor of outcome in NSCLC. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:896.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Desseroit M-C, Visvikis D, Tixier F, Majdoub M, Perdrisot R, Guillevin R, et al. Development of a nomogram combining clinical staging with (18)F-FDG PET/CT image features in non-small-cell lung cancer stage I-III. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1477–85.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Larue RTHM, Defraene G, De Ruysscher D, Lambin P, Van Elmpt W. Quantitative radiomics studies for tissue characterization: a review of technology and methodological procedures. Br J Radiol. 2017;90:20160665.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Aerts HJ, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RT, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Carvalho S, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun. 2014;5:4006.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Coroller T, Grossmann P, Hou Y, Rios Velazquez E, Leijenaar RT, Hermann G, et al. CT-based radiomic signature predicts distant metastasis in lung. Radiother Oncol. 2015;114:345–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Yuan M, Zhang Y-D, Pu X-H, Zhong Y, Li H, Wu J-F, et al. Comparison of a radiomic biomarker with volumetric analysis for decoding tumour phenotypes of lung adenocarcinoma with different disease-specific survival. Eur Radiol. 2017;In press.

  29. 29.

    Parmar C, Leijenaar RT, Grossmann P, Rios-Velazquez E, Bussink J, Rietveld D, et al. Radiomic feature clusters and prognostic signatures specific for lung and head & neck cancer. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11044.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    van Timmeren JE, Leijenaar RTH, van Elmpt W, Reymen B, Oberije C, Monshouwer R, et al. Survival prediction of non-small cell lung cancer patients using radiomics analyses of cone-beam CT images. Radiother Oncol. 2017;123:363–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Huynh E, Coroller TP, Narayan V, Agrawal V, Hou Y, Romano J, et al. CT-based radiomic analysis of stereotactic body radiation therapy patients with lung cancer. Int J Radiat. 2016;120:258–66.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Li Q, Kim J, Balagurunathan Y, Liu Y, Latifi K, Stringfield O, et al. Imaging features from pre-treatment CT scans are associated with clinical outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy. Med Phys. 2017;44:4341–9.

  33. 33.

    Van Velden FHP, Kramer GM, Frings V, Nissen IA, Mulder ER, De Langen AJ, et al. Repeatability of radiomic features in non-small-cell lung cancer [(18F)]FDG-PET/CT studies: impact of reconstruction and delineation. Mol Imaging Biol. 2016;18:788–95.

  34. 34.

    Yan J, Chu-shern JL, Loi HY, Khor LK, Sinha AK, Quek ST, et al. Impact of image reconstruction settings on texture features in 18 F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1667–74.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Elena Vanni for support in patient selection; Paola Bossi and Dahoud Rahal for collaboration in pathological analyses; Marco Alloisio, Giulia Veronesi and the Thoracic Surgery Unit for close collaboration in patient selection and follow-up; Lorenzo Leonardi for image processing; and Riccardo Muglia, Nicolò Gennaro and Orazio Giuseppe Santonocito for their help in patient selection.

M.K. is supported by the AIRC (Italian Association for Cancer Research) scholarship funded by the grant won by A.C. (IG-2016-18585).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

M.S., M.K. and A.C. conceived the idea of the study; L.C., L.L. and A.F. performed the statistical analysis; E.V. collected the data and selected the patients; M.S., M.K. and L.A. reviewed and segmented the images; L.C. performed image analysis; M.S., M.K. and L.C. wrote the manuscript; A.R. edited and reviewed the manuscript.

All the authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martina Sollini.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure of potential

A. Chiti received speaker honoraria from General Electric and Sirtex Medical System, acted as scientific advisor for Blue Earth Diagnostics and benefited from an unconditional grant from Sanofi to Humanitas University. All honoraria and grants are outside the scope of the submitted work.

L. Cozzi acts as Scientific Advisor to Varian Medical Systems. All honoraria are outside the scope of the submitted work.

M. Kirienko is supported by the AIRC (Italian Association for Cancer Research) scholarship funded by the grant won by A.C. (IG-2016-18,585).

Conflict of interest

All other authors have no conflicts of interest.

Research involving human participants

The study was approved by the institutional Ethics Committee. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent was not required.

Electronic supplementary material

Supplementary Fig. 1
figure5

(GIF 27 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 2
figure6

(GIF 173 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 3
figure7

(GIF 143 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 4
figure8

(GIF 76 kb)

ESM 1

(DOCX 25 kb)

High resolution image (TIFF 102048 kb)

High resolution image (TIFF 261601 kb)

High resolution image (TIFF 261601 kb)

High resolution image (TIFF 261601 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kirienko, M., Cozzi, L., Antunovic, L. et al. Prediction of disease-free survival by the PET/CT radiomic signature in non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing surgery. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 45, 207–217 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3837-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Radiomics
  • Lung cancer
  • Prognosis
  • CT
  • PET/CT
  • Texture analysis