Skip to main content
Log in

Intelligent noninvasive meningioma grading with a fully automatic segmentation using interpretable multiparametric deep learning

  • Neuro
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To establish a robust interpretable multiparametric deep learning (DL) model for automatic noninvasive grading of meningiomas along with segmentation.

Methods

In total, 257 patients with pathologically confirmed meningiomas (162 low-grade, 95 high-grade) who underwent a preoperative brain MRI, including T2-weighted (T2) and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted images (T1C), were included in the institutional training set. A two-stage DL grading model was constructed for segmentation and classification based on multiparametric three-dimensional U-net and ResNet. The models were validated in the external validation set consisting of 61 patients with meningiomas (46 low-grade, 15 high-grade). Relevance-weighted Class Activation Mapping (RCAM) method was used to interpret the DL features contributing to the prediction of the DL grading model.

Results

On external validation, the combined T1C and T2 model showed a Dice coefficient of 0.910 in segmentation and the highest performance for meningioma grading compared to the T2 or T1C only models, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.770 (95% confidence interval: 0.644–0.895) and accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 72.1%, 73.3%, and 71.7%, respectively. The AUC and accuracy of the combined DL grading model were higher than those of the human readers (AUCs of 0.675–0.690 and accuracies of 65.6–68.9%, respectively). The RCAM of the DL grading model showed activated maps at the surface regions of meningiomas indicating that the model recognized the features at the tumor margin for grading.

Conclusions

An interpretable multiparametric DL model combining T1C and T2 can enable fully automatic grading of meningiomas along with segmentation.

Key Points

The multiparametric DL model showed robustness in grading and segmentation on external validation.

The diagnostic performance of the combined DL grading model was higher than that of the human readers.

The RCAM interpreted that DL grading model recognized the meaningful features at the tumor margin for grading.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data supporting this finding of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

3D:

Three-dimensional

AUC:

Area under the curve

CI:

Confidence interval

DL:

Deep learning

IQR:

Interquartile range

LRP:

Layer-wise relevance propagation

RCAM:

Relevance-weighted Class Activation Mapping

T1C:

Contrast-enhanced T1-weighted

T2:

T2-weighted

WHO:

World Health Organization

References

  1. Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Xu J et al (2016) CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2009–2013. Neuro Oncol 18:v1–v75

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Kshettry VR, Ostrom QT, Kruchko C, Al-Mefty O, Barnett GH, Barnholtz-Sloan JS (2015) Descriptive epidemiology of World Health Organization grades II and III intracranial meningiomas in the United States. Neuro Oncol 17:1166–1173

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Goldbrunner R, Minniti G, Preusser M et al (2016) EANO guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of meningiomas. Lancet Oncol 17:e383-391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Modha A, Gutin PH (2005) Diagnosis and treatment of atypical and anaplastic meningiomas: a review. Neurosurgery 57:538-550; discussion 538-550

  5. Huang RY, Bi WL, Weller M et al (2019) Proposed response assessment and endpoints for meningioma clinical trials: report from the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group. Neuro Oncol 21:26–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Won SY, Park YW, Ahn SS et al (2021) Quality assessment of meningioma radiomics studies: bridging the gap between exploratory research and clinical applications. Eur J Radiol 138:109673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nowosielski M, Galldiks N, Iglseder S et al (2017) Diagnostic challenges in meningioma. Neuro Oncol 19:1588–1598

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Wadhwa A, Bhardwaj A, Singh Verma V (2019) A review on brain tumor segmentation of MRI images. Magn Reson Imaging 61:247–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Harrison G, Kano H, Lunsford LD, Flickinger JC, Kondziolka D (2016) Quantitative tumor volumetric responses after Gamma Knife radiosurgery for meningiomas. J Neurosurg 124:146–154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Laukamp KR, Thiele F, Shakirin G et al (2019) Fully automated detection and segmentation of meningiomas using deep learning on routine multiparametric MRI. Eur Radiol 29:124–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Laukamp KR, Pennig L, Thiele F et al (2020) Automated meningioma segmentation in multiparametric MRI : comparable effectiveness of a deep learning model and manual segmentation. Clin Neuroradiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00062-020-00884-4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G et al (2016) The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131:803–820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Avants BB, Tustison N, Song G (2009) Advanced normalization tools (ANTS). Insight j 2:1–35

    Google Scholar 

  14. Roy S, Butman JA, Pham DL (2017) Robust skull stripping using multiple MR image contrasts insensitive to pathology. Neuroimage 146:132–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T (2015) U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentationInternational Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. Springer, pp 234-241

  16. Park YW, Jun Y, Lee Y et al (2021) Robust performance of deep learning for automatic detection and segmentation of brain metastases using three-dimensional black-blood and three-dimensional gradient echo imaging. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07783-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. He K, Zhang X, Ren S, Sun J (2015) Delving deep into rectifiers: surpassing human-level performance on imagenet classificationProceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pp 1026-1034

  18. Jun Y, Eo T, Kim T et al (2018) Deep-learned 3D black-blood imaging using automatic labelling technique and 3D convolutional neural networks for detecting metastatic brain tumors. Sci Rep 8:9450

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Maas AL, Hannun AY, Ng AY (2013) Rectifier nonlinearities improve neural network acoustic modelsProc icml. Citeseer, pp 3

  20. Ulyanov D, Vedaldi A, Lempitsky V (2016) Instance normalization: the missing ingredient for fast stylization. arXiv preprint arXiv:160708022

  21. Paszke A, Gross S, Massa F et al (2019) Pytorch: an imperative style, high-performance deep learning library. arXiv preprint arXiv:191201703

  22. Kingma DP, Ba J (2014) Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:14126980

  23. Jeong Ryong Lee SK, Inyong Park, Taejoon Eo, Dosik Hwang (2021) Relevance-CAM: your model already knows where to lookIEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

  24. Zeger SL, Liang KY, Albert PS (1988) Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. Biometrics 44:1049–1060

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Neromyliotis E, Kalamatianos T, Paschalis A et al (2020) Machine learning in meningioma MRI: past to present. A narrative review. J Magn Reson Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27378

  26. Ishi Y, Terasaka S, Yamaguchi S et al (2016) Reliability of the size evaluation method for meningiomas: maximum diameter, ABC/2 formula, and planimetry method. World Neurosurg 94:80–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Laukamp KR, Pennig L, Thiele F et al (2020) Automated meningioma segmentation in multiparametric MRI. Clinical neuroradiology:1-10

  28. Park YW, Shin SJ, Eom J et al (2022) Cycle-consistent adversarial networks improves generalizability of radiomics model in grading meningiomas on external validation. Sci Rep 12:7042

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Zwanenburg A, Vallières M, Abdalah MA et al (2020) The image biomarker standardization initiative: standardized quantitative radiomics for high-throughput image-based phenotyping. Radiology 295:328–338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Moskowitz CS, Welch ML, Jacobs MA, Kurland BF, Simpson AL (2022) Radiomic analysis: study design, statistical analysis, and other bias mitigation strategies. Radiology 304:265–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Banzato T, Causin F, Della Puppa A, Cester G, Mazzai L, Zotti A (2019) Accuracy of deep learning to differentiate the histopathological grading of meningiomas on MR images: a preliminary study. J Magn Reson Imaging 50:1152–1159

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Boxerman JL, Quarles CC, Hu LS et al (2020) Consensus recommendations for a dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI protocol for use in high-grade gliomas. Neuro Oncol 22:1262–1275

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaufmann TJ, Smits M, Boxerman J et al (2020) Consensus recommendations for a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol for clinical trials in brain metastases. Neuro Oncol 22:757–772

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Paek SH, Kim SH, Chang KH et al (2005) Microcystic meningiomas: radiological characteristics of 16 cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 147:965-972; discussion 972

  35. Verma PK, Nangarwal B, Verma J et al (2021) A clinico-pathological and neuro-radiological study of angiomatous meningioma: aggressive look with benign behaviour. J Clin Neurosci 83:43–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yao A, Pain M, Balchandani P, Shrivastava RK (2018) Can MRI predict meningioma consistency?: a correlation with tumor pathology and systematic review. Neurosurg Rev 41:745–753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lin BJ, Chou KN, Kao HW et al (2014) Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging grading and pathological grading in meningioma. J Neurosurg 121:1201–1208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kim JY, Park JE, Jo Y et al (2019) Incorporating diffusion- and perfusion-weighted MRI into a radiomics model improves diagnostic performance for pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. Neuro Oncol 21:404–414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Eo T, Jun Y, Kim T, Jang J, Lee HJ, Hwang D (2018) KIKI-net: cross-domain convolutional neural networks for reconstructing undersampled magnetic resonance images. Magn Reson Med 80:2188–2201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Jun Y, Shin H, Eo T, Kim T, Hwang D (2021) Deep model-based magnetic resonance parameter mapping network (DOPAMINE) for fast T1 mapping using variable flip angle method. Med Image Anal 70:102017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Choi KS, Sunwoo L (2022) Artificial intelligence in neuroimaging: clinical applications. Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging 26:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zhou B, Khosla A, Lapedriza A, Oliva A, Torralba A (2016) Learning deep features for discriminative localizationProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp 2921-2929

  43. Bach S, Binder A, Montavon G, Klauschen F, Müller KR, Samek W (2015) On pixel-wise explanations for non-linear classifier decisions by layer-wise relevance propagation. PLoS One 10:e0130140

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Shin H, Lee J, Eo T, Jun Y, Kim S, Hwang D (2020) The latest trends in attention mechanisms and their application in medical imaging. Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi 81:1305–1333

  45. Selvaraju RR, Cogswell M, Das A, Vedantam R, Parikh D, Batra D (2017) Grad-cam: visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localizationProceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pp 618-626

  46. Park YW, Oh J, You SC et al (2019) Radiomics and machine learning may accurately predict the grade and histological subtype in meningiomas using conventional and diffusion tensor imaging. Eur Radiol 29:4068–4076

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Park YW, Kim S, Ahn SS et al (2020) Magnetic resonance imaging-based 3-dimensional fractal dimension and lacunarity analyses may predict the meningioma grade. Eur Radiol 30:4615–4622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kawahara Y, Nakada M, Hayashi Y et al (2012) Prediction of high-grade meningioma by preoperative MRI assessment. J Neurooncol 108:147–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Shin HK, Park JH, Cho YH et al (2021) Risk factors for high-grade meningioma in brain and spine: systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 151:e718–e730

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, Information and Communication Technologies & Future Planning (2020R1A2C1003886); Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare (HI21C1161); Basic Science Research Program through the NRF funded by the Ministry of Education (2020R1I1A1A01071648); Basic Science Research Program through the NRF funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (2021R1A4A1031437, 2022R1A2C2008983); Brain Research Program through the NRF funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (2018M3C7A1024734); Partially supported by the Yonsei Signature Research Cluster Program of 2022 (2022-22-0002); Artificial Intelligence Graduate School Program, Yonsei University [No. 2020-0-01361]; the KIST Institutional Program (Project No.2E31051-21-204).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Sung Soo Ahn or Dosik Hwang.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Professor Seung-Koo Lee, MD, PhD, from Yonsei University College of Medicine (slee@yuhs.ac).

Conflict of interest

The 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

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise (K.H, a biostatistics professor with 11 years of experience in biostatistics).

Informed consent

The institutional review board waived the requirement to obtain informed patient consent for this retrospective study.

Ethical approval

The Institutional Review Board waived the requirement of informed patient consent for this retrospective study.

Methodology

• retrospective

• diagnostic or prognostic study

• multicenter study

Additional information

Publisher's note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 116 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jun, Y., Park, Y.W., Shin, H. et al. Intelligent noninvasive meningioma grading with a fully automatic segmentation using interpretable multiparametric deep learning. Eur Radiol 33, 6124–6133 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09590-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09590-4

Keywords

Navigation