Abstract
Objectives
The purpose of this study was to investigate the robustness of different PET/CT image radiomic features over a wide range of different reconstruction settings.
Methods
Phantom and patient studies were conducted, including two PET/CT scanners. Different reconstruction algorithms and parameters including number of sub-iterations, number of subsets, full width at half maximum (FWHM) of Gaussian filter, scan time per bed position and matrix size were studied. Lesions were delineated and one hundred radiomic features were extracted. All radiomics features were categorized based on coefficient of variation (COV).
Results
Forty seven percent features showed COV ≤ 5% and 10% of which showed COV > 20%. All geometry based, 44% and 41% of intensity based and texture based features were found as robust respectively. In regard to matrix size, 56% and 6% of all features were found non-robust (COV > 20%) and robust (COV ≤ 5%) respectively.
Conclusions
Variability and robustness of PET/CT image radiomics in advanced reconstruction settings is feature-dependent, and different settings have different effects on different features. Radiomic features with low COV can be considered as good candidates for reproducible tumour quantification in multi-center studies.
Key Points
• PET/CT image radiomics is a quantitative approach assessing different aspects of tumour uptake.
• Radiomic features robustness is an important issue over different image reconstruction settings.
• Variability and robustness of PET/CT image radiomics in advanced reconstruction settings is feature-dependent.
• Robust radiomic features can be considered as good candidates for tumour quantification
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- PET:
-
Positron Emission Tomography
- CT:
-
Computed Tomography
- SUV:
-
Standard Uptake Value
- NSCLC:
-
Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
- MRI:
-
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- NEMA:
-
National Electrical Manufacturers Association
- FDG:
-
Fluoro-Deoxy-Glucose
- KBq:
-
Kilo-Becquerel
- MBq:
-
Mega-Becquerel
- LBR:
-
Lesions to Background Ratio
- GE:
-
General Electric
- OSEM:
-
Ordered Subset Expectation Maximization
- PSF:
-
Point Spread Function
- TOF:
-
Time of Flight
- FWHM:
-
Full Width at Half Maximum
- VOI:
-
Volume of Interest
- GLCM:
-
Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix
- GLRLM:
-
Gray-Level Run-Length Matrix
- GLSZM:
-
Gray-Level Size Zone Matrix
- NGLD:
-
Neighboring Gray Level Dependence
- NGTDM:
-
Neighborhood Gray-Tone Difference Matrix
- TFC:
-
Texture Feature Coding
- TS:
-
Texture Spectrum
- COV:
-
Coefficient Of Variation
- ICC:
-
Inter-Class Correlation
- FBP:
-
Filtered Back Projection
- RECIST:
-
Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours
- PERCIST:
-
PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumours
References
Wahl RL (2008) Principles and practice of PET and PET/CT. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia
Rahmim A, Wahl R (2006) An overview of clinical PET/CT. Iran J Nucl Med 14:1–14
Hatt M, Majdoub M, Vallieres M, Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Groheux D et al (2015) F-18-FDG PET uptake characterization through texture analysis: investigating the complementary nature of heterogeneity and functional tumor volume in a multi-cancer site patient cohort. J Nucl Med 56:38–44
Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Hatt M, Albarghach N, Pradier O, Metges JP et al (2011) Intratumor heterogeneity characterized by textural features on baseline (18)F-FDG pet images predicts response to concomitant radiochemotherapy in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 52:369–378
Cook GJR, Siddique M, Taylor BP, Yip C, Chicklore S, Goh V (2014) Radiomics in PET: principles and applications. Clin Transl Imaging 2:269–276
Aerts HJWL, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RTH, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Carvalho S et al (2014) Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun 5:4006
Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, Carvalho S, van Stiphout RGPM, Granton P et al (2012) Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer 48:441–446
Kumar V, Gu YH, Basu S, Berglund A, Eschrich SA, Schabath MB et al (2012) Radiomics: the process and the challenges. Magn Reson Imaging 30:1234–1248
Lu L, Lv W, Jiang J, Ma J, Feng Q, Rahmim A et al (2016) Robustness of radiomic features in [11C]Choline and [18F]FDG PET/CT imaging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: impact of segmentation and discretization. Mol Imaging Biol 18:935–945
Oh J, Apte A, Folkerts M, Kohutek Z, Wu A, Rimmer A, Lee N, Deasy J. (2014) FDG-PET-based radiomics to predict local control and survival following radiotherapy. Annual Meeting of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine 2014
Leijenaar RTH, Carvalho S, Velazquez ER, Van Elmpt WJC, Parmar C, Hoekstra OS et al (2013) Stability of FDG-PET radiomics features: an integrated analysis of test-retest and inter-observer variability. Acta Oncol 52:1391–1397
Soufi M, Kamali-Asl A, Geramifar P, Rahmim A (2016) A novel framework for automated segmentation and labeling of homogeneous versus heterogeneous lung tumors in [18F]FDG PET imaging. Molec Imag Biol. In Press. doi:10.1007/s11307-016-1015-0
Chicklore S, Goh V, Siddique M, Roy A, Marsden PK, Cook GJR (2013) Quantifying tumour heterogeneity in F-18-FDG PET/CT imaging by texture analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40:133–140
El Naqa I, Grigsby PW, Apte A, Kidd E, Donnelly E, Khullar D et al (2009) Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes. Pattern Recogn 42:1162–1171
Hatt M, Le Pogam A, Visvikis D, Pradier O, Le Rest CC (2012) Impact of partial-volume effect correction on the predictive and prognostic value of baseline F-18-FDG PET images in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 53:12–20
Hatt M, Tixier F, Pierce L, Kinahan PE, Le Rest CC, Visvikis D (2017) Characterization of PET/CT images using texture analysis: the past, the presenta… any future? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44:151–165
Rahmim A, Salimpour Y, Jain S, Blinder S, Klyuzhin IS, Smith G, et al. (2016) Application of texture analysis to DAT SPECT imaging: relationship to clinical assesments. NeuroImage: Clin 12. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.02.012
Vallières M, Freeman C, Skamene S, El Naqa I (2015) A radiomics model from joint FDG-PET and MRI texture features for the prediction of lung metastases in soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremities. Phys Med Biol 60:5471
Yang F, Thomas MA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW (2013) Temporal analysis of intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity characterized by textural features in cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40:716–727
Tan S, Kligerman S, Chen W, Lu M, Kim G, Feigenberg S et al (2013) Spatial-temporal [18 F] FDG-PET features for predicting pathologic response of esophageal cancer to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85:1375–1382
Ashrafinia S, Gonzalez EM, Mohy-ud-Din H, Jha A, Subramaniam RM, Rahmim A (2016) Adaptive PSF modeling for enhanced heterogeneity quantification in oncologic PET imaging. Proc Soc Nuc Med Med Imag Ann Meet 57:497
Shiri IRA, Abdollahi H, Ghafarian P, Bitarafan-Rajabi A, AY MR, BakhshaieshKaram M, (Suppl 1) (2016) Radiomics texture features variability and reproducibility in advance image reconstruction setting of oncological PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:S1-S734
Leijenaar RT, Nalbantov G, Carvalho S, van Elmpt WJ, Troost EG, Boellaard R et al (2015) The effect of SUV discretization in quantitative FDG-PET radiomics: the need for standardized methodology in tumor texture analysis. Sci Rep 5:11075
van Velden FH, Kramer GM, Frings V, Nissen IA, Mulder ER, de Langen AJ et al (2016) Repeatability of radiomic features in non-small-cell lung cancer [18F] FDG-PET/CT studies: impact of reconstruction and delineation. Mol Imaging Biol 18:788–795
Oliver JA, Budzevich M, Zhang GG, Dilling TJ, Latifi K, Moros EG (2015) Variability of image features computed from conventional and respiratory-gated PET/CT images of lung cancer. Transl Oncol 8:524–534
Rahmim A, Qi J, Sossi V (2013) Resolution modeling in PET imaging: theory, practice, benefits, and pitfalls. Med Phys 40:064301
Tong S, Alessio AM, Kinahan PE (2010) Noise and signal properties in PSF-based fully 3D PET image reconstruction: an experimental evaluation. Phys Med Biol 55:1453–1473
Alessio A, Rahmim A, Orton CG (2013) Resolution modeling enhances PET imaging (point/counterpoint). Med Phys 40:120601
Schaefferkoetter J, Casey M, Townsend D, El Fakhri G (2013) Clinical impact of time-of-flight and point response modeling in PET reconstructions: a lesion detection study. Phys Med Biol 58:1465–1478
Kadrmas DJ, Casey ME, Conti M, Jakoby BW, Lois C, Townsend DW (2009) Impact of time-of-flight on PET tumor detection. J Nucl Med 50:1315–1323
Moses WW (2003) Time of flight in PET revisited. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 50:1325–1330
Surti S (2015) Update on time-of-Flight PET imaging. J Nucl Med 56:98–105
Aerts HJ (2016) The potential of radiomic-based phenotyping in precision medicine: a review. JAMA Oncol 2:1636–1642
Kotasidis FA, Tsoumpas C, Rahmim A (2014) Advanced kinetic modelling strategies: towards adoption in clinical PET imaging. Clin Transl Imaging 2:219–237
Karakatsanis NA, Lodge MA, Tahari AK, Zhou Y, Wahl RL, Rahmim A (2013) Dynamic whole body PET parametric imaging: I. Concept, acquisition protocol optimization and clinical application. Phys Med Bio 58:7391–7418
Huang S-C (2000) Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol 27:643–646
Nyflot MJ, Yang F, Byrd D, Bowen SR, Sandison GA, Kinahan PE (2015) Quantitative radiomics: impact of stochastic effects on textural feature analysis implies the need for standards. J Med Imaging 2:041002
Cheng N-M, Fang Y-HD, Tsan D-L, Hsu C-H, Yen T-C (2016) Respiration-averaged CT for attenuation correction of PET images–impact on PET texture features in non-small cell lung cancer patients. PLoS One 11, e0150509
Doumou G, Siddique M, Tsoumpas C, Goh V, Cook GJ (2015) The precision of textural analysis in 18F-FDG-PET scans of oesophageal cancer. Eur Radiol 25:2805–2812
Yan J, Chu-Shern JL, Loi HY, Khor LK, Sinha AK, Quek ST et al (2015) Impact of image reconstruction settings on texture features in 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 56:1667–1673
Bailly C, Bodet-Milin C, Couespel S, Necib H, Kraeber-Bodéré F, Ansquer C et al (2016) Revisiting the robustness of PET-based textural features in the context of multi-centric trials. PLoS One 11, e0159984
Cortes-Rodicio J, Sanchez-Merino G, Garcia-Fidalgo M, Tobalina-Larrea I (2016) Identification of low variability textural features for heterogeneity quantification of 18 F-FDG PET/CT imaging. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 35:379–384
Forgacs A, Jonsson HP, Dahlbom M, Daver F, DiFranco MD, Opposits G et al (2016) A study on the basic criteria for selecting heterogeneity parameters of F18-FDG PET images. PLoS One 11, e0164113
Galavis PE, Hollensen C, Jallow N, Paliwal B, Jeraj R (2010) Variability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters. Acta Oncol 49:1012–1016
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247
Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA, Suppl_1 (2009) From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for pet response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 50:122S-50S
Acknowledgements
The authors sincerely thank the PET/CT Departments at Masih Daneshvari and Shariati Hospitals for their collaboration and facilities.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Guarantor
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Hamid Abdollahi, BS, MS, PhD.
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.
Funding
This study has received funding by the Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran with the grant number 27870.
Statistics and biometry
All authors kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript.
One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.
Ethical approval
Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.
Informed consent
Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study.
Methodology
• prospective
• diagnostic or prognostic study/experimental
• multicenter study
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 1
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 3
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 4
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 5
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 6
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 7
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 8
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 9
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 10
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 11
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 12
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 13
(DOCX 22 kb)
ESM 14
(DOCX 18 kb)
ESM 15
(DOCX 17 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shiri, I., Rahmim, A., Ghaffarian, P. et al. The impact of image reconstruction settings on 18F-FDG PET radiomic features: multi-scanner phantom and patient studies. Eur Radiol 27, 4498–4509 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4859-z
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4859-z