Skip to main content

CT radiomics nomogram for the preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer

European Radiology volume 30, pages 976–986 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the role of computed tomography (CT) radiomics for the preoperative prediction of lymph node (LN) metastasis in gastric cancer.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study included 247 consecutive patients (training cohort, 197 patients; test cohort, 50 patients) with surgically proven gastric cancer. Dedicated radiomics prototype software was used to segment lesions on preoperative arterial phase (AP) CT images and extract features. A radiomics model was constructed to predict the LN metastasis by using a random forest (RF) algorithm. Finally, a nomogram was built incorporating the radiomics scores and selected clinical predictors. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to validate the capability of the radiomics model and nomogram on both the training and test cohorts.

Results

The radiomics model showed a favorable discriminatory ability in the training cohort with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.844 (95% CI, 0.759 to 0.909), which was confirmed in the test cohort with an AUC of 0.837 (95% CI, 0.705 to 0.926). The nomogram consisted of radiomics scores and the CT-reported LN status showed excellent discrimination in the training and test cohorts with AUCs of 0.886 (95% CI, 0.808 to 0.941) and 0.881 (95% CI, 0.759 to 0.956), respectively.

Conclusions

The CT-based radiomics nomogram holds promise for use as a noninvasive tool in the individual prediction of LN metastasis in gastric cancer.

Key Points

• CT radiomics showed a favorable performance for the prediction of LN metastasis in gastric cancer.

• Radiomics model outperformed the routine CT in predicting LN metastasis in gastric cancer.

• The radiomics nomogram holds potential in the individualized prediction of LN metastasis in gastric cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Abbreviations

AP:

Arterial phase

AUC:

Area under the curve

CART:

Classification and regression tree

CT:

Computed tomography

DCA:

Decision curve analysis

DICOM:

Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine

ICC:

Intraclass correlation coefficient

GLCM:

Gray-level co-occurrence matrix

GLRLM:

Gray-level run-length matrix

LN:

Lymph node

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

NAC:

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy

RF:

Random forest

ROC:

Receiver operating characteristics

VOI:

Volume of interest

References

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 0:1–31

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fukagawa T, Katai H, Mizusawa J et al (2018) A prospective multi-institutional validity study to evaluate the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of pathological stage III gastric cancer (JCOG1302A). Gastric Cancer 21:68–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Smyth EC, Verheij M, Allum W, Cunningham D, Cervantes A, Arnold D (2016) Gastric cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 27:v38–v49

  4. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2018) National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines in oncology: gastric cancer (Ver. 2). NCCN. Bethesda. Available via: http://www.nccn.org/ Accessed at 11 Oct 2018

  5. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2018) Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines (ver. 5). Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Tokyo. Available via https://www.kanehara-shuppan.co.jp/ Accessed at 11 Oct 2018

  6. Kodera Y (2017) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric adenocarcinoma in Japan. Surg Today 47:899–907

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim AY, Kim HJ, Ha HK (2005) Gastric cancer by multidetector row CT: preoperative staging. Abdom Imaging 30:465–472

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kinner S, Maderwald S, Albert J et al (2013) Discrimination of benign and malignant lymph nodes at 7.0T compared to 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging using ultrasmall particles of iron oxide: a feasibility preclinical study. Acad Radiol 20:1604–1609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Park HS, Kim YJ, Ko SY et al (2012) Benign regional lymph nodes in gastric cancer on multidetector row CT. Acta Radiol 53:501–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim HJ, Kim AY, Oh ST et al (2005) Gastric Cancer staging at multi–detector row CT gastrography: comparison of transverse and volumetric CT scanning. Radiology 236:879–885

  11. Jin EH, Lee DH, Jung SA et al (2015) Clinicopathologic factors and molecular markers related to lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 21:571–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Xu YY, Huang BJ, Sun Z, Lu C, Liu YP (2007) Risk factors for lymph node metastasis and evaluation of reasonable surgery for early gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 13:5133–5138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Merkow RP, Bilimoria KY, Keswani RN et al (2014) Treatment trends, risk of lymph node metastasis, and outcomes for localized esophageal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 106. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju133

  14. Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R et al (2012) Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer 48:441–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kumar V, Gu Y, Basu S et al (2012) Radiomics: the process and the challenges. Magn Reson Imaging 30:1234–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lambin P, Leijenaar RTH, Deist TM et al (2017) Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14:749–762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ba-Ssalamah A, Muin D, Schernthaner R et al (2013) Texture-based classification of different gastric tumors at contrast-enhanced CT. Eur J Radiol 82:e537–e543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ma Z, Fang M, Huang Y et al (2017) CT-based radiomics signature for differentiating Borrmann type IV gastric cancer from primary gastric lymphoma. Eur J Radiol 91:142–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu S, Liu S, Ji C et al (2017) Application of CT texture analysis in predicting histopathological characteristics of gastric cancers. Eur Radiol 27:4951–4959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu S, Zhang Y, Chen L et al (2017) Whole-lesion apparent diffusion coefficient histogram analysis: significance in T and N staging of gastric cancers. BMC Cancer 17:665. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3622-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu S, Zhang Y, Xia J et al (2017) Predicting the nodal status in gastric cancers: the role of apparent diffusion coefficient histogram characteristic analysis. Magn Reson Imaging 42:144–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang Y, Chen J, Liu S et al (2017) Assessment of histological differentiation in gastric cancers using whole-volume histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient maps. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:440–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Giganti F, Antunes S, Salerno A et al (2017) Gastric cancer: texture analysis from multidetector computed tomography as a potential preoperative prognostic biomarker. Eur Radiol 27:1831–1839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Giganti F, Marra P, Ambrosi A et al (2017) Pre-treatment MDCT-based texture analysis for therapy response prediction in gastric cancer: comparison with tumour regression grade at final histology. Eur J Radiol 90:129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hou Z, Yang Y, Li S et al (2018) Radiomic analysis using contrast-enhanced CT: predict treatment response to pulsed low dose rate radiotherapy in gastric carcinoma with abdominal cavity metastasis. Quant Imaging Med Surg 8:410–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Li W, Zhang L, Tian C et al (2018) Prognostic value of computed tomography radiomics features in patients with gastric cancer following curative resection. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5861-9

  27. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2011) Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric Cancer 14:97–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Beam CA (1992) Strategies for improving power in diagnostic radiology research. AJR Am J Roentgenol 159:631–637

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H (2016) Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology 278:563–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Suthaharan S (2016) Machine learning models and algorithms for big data classification: thinking with examples for effective learning, 1st edn. Springer US, New York

  31. Zhang N, Yang G, Gao Z et al (2019) Deep learning for diagnosis of chronic myocardial infarction on nonenhanced cardiac cine MRI. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182304

  32. Nicosia G, Pardalos P, Giuffrida G, Umeton R (2018) Machine learning, optimization, and big data: third international conference, MOD 2017, Volterra, Italy, September 14–17, 2017, revised selected papers Springer International Publishing, Switzerland

  33. Aerts HJ, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RT et al (2014) Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun 5:4006. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5006

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Yuan M, Zhang YD, Pu XH et al (2017) Comparison of a radiomic biomarker with volumetric analysis for decoding tumour phenotypes of lung adenocarcinoma with different disease-specific survival. Eur Radiol 27:4857–4865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sandri M, Zuccolotto P (2006) Data analysis, classification and the forward search, 1st edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hintze J, Nelson R (1998) Violin plots: a box plot-density trace synergism. Am Stat 52:181–184

  37. Van Calster B, Wynants L, Verbeek JFM et al (2018) Reporting and interpreting decision curve analysis: a guide for investigators. Eur Urol 74:796–804

  38. Giganti F, Tang L, Baba H (2018) Gastric cancer and imaging biomarkers: part 1 - a critical review of DW-MRI and CE-MDCT findings. Eur Radiol 29:1743–1753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cardoso R, Coburn N, Seevaratnam R et al (2012) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the utility of EUS for preoperative staging for gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 15(Suppl 1):S19–S26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Feng QX, Liu C, Qi L et al (2019) An intelligent clinical decision support system for preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2018.12.017

  41. Li J, Fang M, Wang R et al (2018) Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT-based nomograms to predict lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer. Eur Radiol 28:5241–5249

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to appreciate our co-author Yang Yu from the Siemens Healthineers for assisting in radiomics model construction and statistical analysis. The authors also acknowledge Wei Han from the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, for his kind help for statistical analysis.

Funding

The study was funded by National Public Welfare Basic Scientific Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (Grant Nos. 2018PT32003 and 2017PT32004).

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 1, Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Bejing, 100730, People’s Republic of China

    Yue Wang, Wei Liu, Jing-juan Liu, Hua-dan Xue, Ya-fei Qi, Jing Lei & Zheng-yu Jin

  2. CT Collaboration, Siemens Healthineers Ltd., 59# Beizhan Road, Shenyang, 110013, People’s Republic of China

    Yang Yu

  3. Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, No. 1, Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Bejing, 100730, People’s Republic of China

    Jian-chun Yu

Authors
  1. Yue Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wei Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yang Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jing-juan Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hua-dan Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ya-fei Qi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jing Lei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jian-chun Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Zheng-yu Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jian-chun Yu or Zheng-yu Jin.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof. Zheng-yu Jin.

Conflict of interest

One of the co-authors, Yang Yu, is an employee of Siemens Healthineers. The other authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

Our co-author Yang Yu and Wei Han from the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• diagnostic or prognostic study

• performed at one institution

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, Y., Liu, W., Yu, Y. et al. CT radiomics nomogram for the preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer. Eur Radiol 30, 976–986 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06398-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06398-z

Keywords

  • Gastric cancer
  • Radiomics
  • Nomogram