If you don't remember your password, you can reset it by entering your email address and clicking the Reset Password button. You will then receive an email that contains a secure link for resetting your password
If the address matches a valid account an email will be sent to __email__ with instructions for resetting your password
Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, PR ChinaDepartment of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, PR ChinaDepartment of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
Zhaoxiang Ye, MD, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Huan-Hu-Xi Rd, Ti-Yuan-Bei, He Xi District, Tianjin 300060, PR China. Fax: +86-22-23537796
Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, PR China
Addresses for correspondence: Robert J. Gillies, PhD, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Dr, Tampa, FL 33612. Fax: 813-745-7265
Department of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FLDepartment of Radiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
In this study we retrospectively evaluated the capability of computed tomography (CT)-based radiomic features to predict epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status in surgically-resected peripheral lung adenocarcinomas in an Asian cohort of patients.
Patients and Methods
Two hundred ninety-eight patients with surgically resected peripheral lung adenocarcinomas were investigated in this institutional review board-approved retrospective study with requirement waived to obtain informed consent. Two hundred nineteen quantitative 3-D features were extracted from segmented volumes of each tumor, and 59 of these, which were considered independent features, were included in the analysis. Clinical and pathological information was obtained from the institutional database.
Results
Mutant EGFR was significantly associated with female sex (P = .0005); never smoker status (P < .0001), lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas (P = .017), and low or intermediate pathologic grade (P = .0002). Statistically significant differences were found in 11 radiomic features between EGFR mutant and wild type groups in univariate analysis. Mutant EGFR status could be predicted by a set of 5 radiomic features that fell into 3 broad groups: CT attenuation energy, tumor main direction, and texture defined according to wavelets and Laws (area under the curve [AUC], 0.647). A multiple logistic regression model showed that adding radiomic features to a clinical model resulted in a significant improvement of predicting power, because the AUC increased from 0.667 to 0.709 (P < .0001).
Conclusion
Computed tomography-based radiomic features of peripheral lung adenocarcinomas can capture useful information regarding tumor phenotype, and the model we built can be useful to predict the presence of EGFR mutations in peripheral lung adenocarcinoma in Asian patients when mutational profiling is not available or possible.
Over the past decade, molecular translational research advances have heralded major breakthroughs in the understanding, diagnosis, and management of lung cancer, particularly the development of new target-based therapies directed against key signaling pathways involved in lung cancer growth and malignant progression.
Impact of epidermal growth factor receptor and KRAS mutations on clinical outcomes in previously untreated non–small-cell lung cancer patients: results of an online tumor registry of clinical trials.
Small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that target the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) were the first targeted drugs to enter clinical use for the treatment of NSCLC. Patients with EGFR mutations have a higher response rate to EGFR TKIs (60%-80%) than those with EGFR wild type or unknown mutation status (10%-20%).
Clinical course of patients with non–small-cell lung cancer and epidermal growth factor receptor exon 19 and exon 21 mutations treated with gefitinib or erlotinib.
Randomized trials have clearly shown that treatments with targeted TKIs, such as erlotinib, gefitinib, or afatinib are associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) and higher objective radiographic response rates than standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with mutated EGFR lung cancer.
LUX-Lung 3: a randomized, open-label, phase III study of afatinib versus pemetrexed and cisplatin as first-line treatment for patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung harboring EGFR-activating mutations.
First-line gefitinib versus first-line chemotherapy by carboplatin (CBDCA) plus paclitaxel (TXL) in non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (pts) with EGFR mutations: a phase III study (002) by North East Japan Gefitinib Study Group.
Gefitinib versus cisplatin plus docetaxel in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer harbouring mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (WJTOG3405): an open label, randomised phase 3 trial.
However, if gefitinib is administered in the case of non-EGFR mutated lung cancer, the patient will experience a shorter PFS compared with platinum-based chemotherapy,
highlighting the importance of identifying this genetically unique subset of patients.
Cumulative epidemiology studies have identified several clinicopathological factors such as female, nonsmoker, adenocarcinoma histology, and East Asian origin that were associated with a high prevalence of EGFR mutation.
Unfortunately, there are no reliable clinical characteristics that allow for accurate prediction of EGFR mutation status. For some patients, biopsy samples might be the only tumor materials available for testing EGFR mutation status and they are often composed of variable ratios of tumor to normal cells.
Thus, mutant DNA alleles present at extremely low concentrations become difficult to detect, leading to a false negative result. Further, because of intratumoral heterogeneity, the portion of the tumor tested for EGFR mutation might also result as negative but might be truly positive.
2 sequencing-based mutation detection approaches (dideoxy and pyrosequencing) were validated against parallel sequencing in a clinical setting, and the results showed that dideoxy sequencing missed 4 responders and pyrosequencing missed 2 responders; meanwhile, precise quantification of mutant alleles revealed a low correlation of histopathological estimates of tumor content and frequency of mutant alleles, indicating that sequencing technologies with inferior sensitivity might fail to detect clinically relevant oncogene mutations in cancer patients. Therefore, when receiving a negative mutation analysis result, one must consider whether the cell sample was truly representative for the EGFR mutation status of the lung tumor.
There have been several reports regarding the relationship between computed tomography (CT) features and EGFR mutation status in NSCLC
Imaging characteristics of stage I non–small-cell lung cancer on CT and FDG-PET: relationship with epidermal growth factor receptor protein expression status and survival.
reported that EGFR mutation was significantly associated with air bronchogram, pleural retraction, small lesion size, and absence of fibrosis. Recent technological advances in medical imaging allow high-throughput extraction of quantitative imaging features. Radiomics is the process of converting images to mineable data through computational approaches. These data can be used to develop decision support systems to accurately estimate patient risk and improve individualized treatment.
Several studies have shown that such features extracted from CT images of lung cancers can be useful to distinguish radiation-induced fibrosis from tumor recurrence,
Texture analysis of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) on contrast-enhanced computed tomography: prediction of the response to the first-line chemotherapy.
CT imaging is routinely used in lung cancer, and we thus hypothesize that if CT-based radiomic features associated with EGFR mutation status can be determined, they could provide a useful clinical predictor in patients with unresectable lung cancer or those in whom biopsy is unable to be performed. Imaging-based risk models might also provide additional information for clinicians on whether rebiopsy is needed for patients with a negative EGFR mutation result. Therefore, in this retrospective study, we performed a radiomic analysis to identify image biomarkers of harboring the EGFR mutation in peripheral lung adenocarcinomas in a Chinese cohort of patients.
Patients and Methods
This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board. Requirement for informed consent was waived.
Study Population
A consecutive search of the surgical database at our institution between December 2012 and March 2014 identified 397 patients with primary lung adenocarcinoma who fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: (1) pathology reports with diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma; (2) preoperative thin-section CT images at in the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS), and the location of the lesion was peripheral (tumor involving subsegmental bronchus or smaller airway); (3) available test results for EGFR mutation status; and (4) available clinical data. Thereafter, 99 patients were excluded because of the following reasons: receiving preoperative treatment, such as radiotherapy or chemotherapy; the duration between CT examination and subsequence surgery exceeded 1 month; and patients with lung cancer for which it is difficult to contour the tumor margin on CT images.
Clinical and pathological data collected for analysis included sex, age at diagnosis, smoking status, pathologic tumor, node, metastases stage, and histologic lung adenocarcinoma subtypes. Smoking status was categorized into 2 groups; never smokers and smokers, which included former and current smokers. Tumors were staged pathologically according to the seventh edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual.
Tumors were diagnosed as adenocarcinoma and then categorized according to the 2011 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, American Thoracic Society, and European Respiratory Society classification system.
International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society: international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma: executive summary.
Chest CT examinations were conducted using Somatom Sensation 64 (Siemens Medical Solutions, Forchheim, Germany), Light speed 16 (GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI), or Discovery CT750 HD scanner (GE Medical Systems). The parameters used were as follows: 120 kVp with tube current adjusted automatically, pitch was 0.969, reconstruction thickness was 1.5 mm, and reconstruction interval was 1.5 mm for the 64-detector scanner; tube voltage was 120 kVp, tube current was 150 to 200 mA, pitch was 0.969; reconstruction thickness was 1.25 mm, and reconstruction interval was 1.25 mm for the 16-detector scanner and Discovery CT750 HD scanner (GE Medical Systems).
Detection of EGFR Mutations
For the gene mutation analysis, tumor specimens were obtained using surgical resection. We performed EGFR mutation analyses of 4 tyrosine kinase domain (exons 18-21), which are frequently mutated in lung cancer, as previously described.
Routine EGFR molecular analysis in non–small-cell lung cancer patients is feasible: exons 18–21 sequencing results of 753 patients and subsequent clinical outcomes.
EGFR mutations were determined using an amplification refractory mutation system real-time technology using Human EGFR Gene Mutations Detection Kit (Beijing ACCB Biotech Ltd).
Tumor Segmentation
We used Definiens Developer XD (Munich, Germany) as the image analysis platform to perform tumor segmentation and feature extraction. A lung tumor analysis tool within Definiens Cognition Network Technology was used. Lesions were volumetrically segmented using a semiautomatic approach by 2 radiologists with more than 6 and 3 years of experience in CT imaging of thoracic malignancies, respectively (Figure 1). The semiautomatic segmentation work flow which contained the following 4 steps named preprocessing, semiautomated correction of the pulmonary boundary, click and grow, and manual refinement and generation of lesion statistics were described in detail in previous studies.
which is an advanced version of the previous click and grow algorithm and reduces sensitivity toward the location of the initial seed-point, was used. The SCES makes use of the original algorithm by choosing different seed points automatically within a specified area of the lesion and performing region-growing with each generated seed point. Each of the 2 radiologists reviewed the segmented images in consensus, and any discrepancies were resolved by discussion until consensus was reached.
Figure 1Representative Computed Tomography Image With Tumor Segmentation Using a Semiautomated Algorithm for Peripheral Adenocarcinoma. (A) A Lobulated Lung Tumor in the Right Middle Lobe Was Chosen for Segmentation. (B) One Radiologist Segmented the Boundary of the Tumor, Which Is Shown in Green Outline. (C) Three-Dimensional View of the Lung and Segmented Tumor
We extracted a total of 219 features from each of the 3-D objects. These features were divided into 8 categories, including tumor size, shape, location, air space, pixel intensity histogram, run length and co-occurrence, Laws texture, and wavelets. A description of all features is provided (Supplemental Table 1 in the online version), and detailed description of texture features can be found in the previous study.
Our features cover a variety of descriptors from size, location, attachment of the lesion of interest, to CT pixel distribution and texture according to appearance on CT image. We characterized texture in observed CT images using the Laws feature descriptor and in the decomposed domain by using wavelets. Texture features are known to carry information that are not always typically observed by the human eye. Metrics were described by wavelet transformation, and Laws features are considered to describe subtle characteristics in the image and have been shown to be useful in image classifications.
All statistical analyses was performed using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary NC). Power transformation was considered to apply parametric analytical tools. The correlation between features was investigated to address collinearity issues. The highly correlated features (correlation > 0.9) were regarded as dependent features, which were not considered in this analysis. Thus, 59 of 219 features were considered as mutually independent features for prediction of EGFR mutation. Fisher exact test and the Kruskal–Wallis test were used for categorical and continuous variables between 2 groups, respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. The final model was selected using the backward elimination method. Variables with a P value of < .25 in the univariate model were entered in the initial model, and then a variable with a P value of > .15 was eliminated at each step. The elimination procedure was terminated when the P value of all variables in the model was < .15. The accuracy and error of the predictive models (ie, the area under the curve [AUC] and 95% confidence interval [CI]) were estimated using the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap samples. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for each model were constructed and the AUC was calculated with EGFR mutation status determined using an amplification refractory mutation system-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as outcome. Further, various predictive models were developed using the support vector machine and principal component analysis and were compared with the logistic regression model. In this study, the regression model was selected as the AUC of the model that was higher than any other models (results were omitted). A 2-sided P value of < .05 was regarded as statistically significant.
Results
The patient demographic and clinicopathological data are presented in Table 1. All 298 of the enrolled patients were surgically treated: lobectomy in 280 patients, pneumonectomy in 4, wedge resection in 6, and segmentectomy in 8 patients. Overall, there were 126 men and 172 women with a median age of 60 years (range, 30-80 years). The pathologic stage distribution was as follows: IA in 117 patients (39.26%), IB in 63 patients (21.14%), IIA in 22 patients (7.38%), IIB in 6 patients (2.01%), IIIA in 72 patients (24.16%), IIIB in 2 patients (0.67%), and IV in 16 patients (5.37%). Most of the tumors were early stage (stage I or II; 208 [69.80%] of 298). All cases were lung adenocarcinomas and the most common histologic subtype among invasive adenocarcinomas was acinar predominant subtype (128 [42.95%] of 298), followed by lepidic predominant subtype (71 [23.83%] of 298). EGFR mutation results (Supplemental Table 2 in the online version) were satisfactorily shown in all patents, with 137 patients (45.97%) of the full cohort of 298 cases identified as EGFR mutant and 161 (54.03%) as EGFR wild type.
Table 1Clinicopathological Characteristics of Patients
Adenocarcinoma in situ and MIA were classified as low grade; lepidic, acinar, and papillary as intermediate grade; micropapillary, solid, and invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma as high grade. One case with enteric was eliminated in this analysis.
Histologic subtype was categorized as lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas (adenocarcinoma in situ, MIA, and lepidic predominant invasive adenocarcinoma) and other subtypes of dominant histologic findings (acinar, papillary, micropapillary, and solid predominant as well as variants of invasive adenocarcinoma).
.022
Lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas
74
43 (31.39)
31 (19.25)
Other
224
94 (68.61)
130 (80.75)
Stage
.53
I or II
208
93 (67.88)
115 (71.43)
III or IV
90
44 (32.12)
46 (28.57)
Data are presented as n, or n (%), except where otherwise noted.
Abbreviation: MIA = minimally invasive adenocarcinoma.
a Adenocarcinoma in situ and MIA were classified as low grade; lepidic, acinar, and papillary as intermediate grade; micropapillary, solid, and invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma as high grade. One case with enteric was eliminated in this analysis.
b Histologic subtype was categorized as lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas (adenocarcinoma in situ, MIA, and lepidic predominant invasive adenocarcinoma) and other subtypes of dominant histologic findings (acinar, papillary, micropapillary, and solid predominant as well as variants of invasive adenocarcinoma).
There were significant differences in sex, smoking status, pathologic grade, and histologic subtype between the EGFR wild type group and the EGFR mutant group (Table 1). Concerning sex, there were significantly more female patients with mutant, compared with wild type EGFR in lung adenocarcinomas (odds ratio [OR], 2.33; 95% CI, 1.45-3.74; P = .001). Smokers with mutant EGFR were significant fewer than smokers with wild type (OR, 2.99; 95% CI, 1.85-4.82; P < .0001). EGFR mutations were also significantly more frequent in patients with low or intermediate pathologic grade (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.67-5.30; P = .0002), and patients with lepidic-predominant adenocarcinomas (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.13-3.27; P = .022). There were no differences in stage distribution or median age between EGFR mutant and wild type groups (P = .53; P = .51). Univariate analyses revealed that 4 clinical factors might be associated with EGFR mutation status in peripheral lung adenocarcinoma: sex, smoking status, histologic subtype, and pathologic grade were all significant predictors of harboring an EGFR mutation (Table 2).
Table 2Univariate Analysis for Clinicopathological Factors That Predict Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation Status
We then investigated the association of radiomic features with EGFR mutation status. Because this analysis produced far more features that were considered dependent; only a prioritized subset of features were selected for further analysis to avoid overfitting. Prioritization methods are described in Locatelli-Sanchez et al.
Routine EGFR molecular analysis in non–small-cell lung cancer patients is feasible: exons 18–21 sequencing results of 753 patients and subsequent clinical outcomes.
Fifty-nine independent features were selected finally (Supplemental Table 3 in the online version). Among these 59 independent features, 11 were independent predictors of harboring the EGFR mutation (Table 3, Supplemental Table 4 in the online version) in univariate analysis, including 1 feature describing tumor shape (F26), 2 features describing tumor location (F17, F27), 1 feature describing air space (F19), 2 pixel intensity histogram-based features (F185, F186), 2 run length and co–occurrence-based features (F47, F51), 2 Laws texture features (F90, F111), and 1 wavelet texture feature (F190).
Table 3Univariate Analysis for Radiomic Features That Predict Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation Status
With multiple logistic regression analyses, clinical features of smoking status and pathologic grade proved to be independent predictors of EGFR mutation, and the AUC of ROC was 0.667 (95% CI, 0.604-0.721). The multiple logistic regression model produced from radiomic features alone showed moderate predictive power (AUC, 0.647; 95% CI, 0.576-0.701) for identifying EGFR mutant status. There was a significant difference between AUCs of the logistic regression model incorporating only clinical features, and that incorporating only radiomic features (P < .0001). When clinical and radiomic features were combined, the AUC was increased to 0.709 (95% CI, 0.654-0.766; Table 4). The model generated with combined clinical and radiomic features was superior to the model generated with clinical features alone (P < .0001) and the model created with radiomic features alone (P < .0001; Figure 2).
Table 4Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis of Clinicopathological Parameters and Radiomic Features Predicting the Presence of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation in Peripheral Lung Adenocarcinomas
Figure 2Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves for the Prediction of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation Using a Logistic Regression Model That Included Clinical Factors Alone (Green Line), a Model That Used Radiomic Features Alone (Red Line), and a Model That Combined Clinical Factors and Radiomic Features (Blue Line). The Highest Area Under the Curve (AUC) Was Achieved for the Combination of Clinical Factors and Radiomic Features (AUC = 0.709)
There are various methods to detect EGFR mutations, such as direct sequencing of PCR-amplified genomic DNA, high-resolution melting analysis, fragment analysis, restriction fragment length polymorphism, and the amplification refractory mutation system
; however, these molecular methods are generally costly, and sometimes in a low percentage of tumor cells, we would have most likely missed the mutations and rebiopsy had to be recommended. In this study, we sought to apply radiomic features to peripheral lung adenocarcinomas to determine if we could noninvasively discriminate EGFR-mutant from EGFR-wild type cases in a routine practice without adding additional cost.
We found that 137 of the tumors harbored the EGFR mutation, which corresponded to 45.97% of the 298 tumor samples, this is in keeping with previous reports on Asian patients
; in addition, exon 19 and exon 21, the most common mutation types of the EGFR gene, showed nearly the same percentage in these patients (46.72% (64/137), 48.91% (67/137), respectively). Dual mutations were detected in 1 patient (0.73%) in this study, confirming that the existence of EGFR TKI-resistant (exon 20) and -sensitive mutation (exon 21) is rare. Several studies indicated that the EGFR mutation was strongly related with never smokers, female sex, adenocarcinoma, and pathologic stage.
Routine EGFR molecular analysis in non–small-cell lung cancer patients is feasible: exons 18–21 sequencing results of 753 patients and subsequent clinical outcomes.
Consistent with most of these findings, the rate of EGFR mutation in female and never-smoker patients with lung adenocarcinomas was considerably higher compared with male and smoker patients in this study. Although the EGFR mutation was detected more frequently in early-stage patients (93 [67.88%] of 298) compared with advanced stage (44 [32.12%] of 137), the difference was not significant. The results of the multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that pathologic grade and smoking status were independent predictors for EGFR mutation and the AUC was 0.667. Besides clinical information, more detailed factors will likely be required to identify those at high probability of harboring EGFR mutations.
Computed tomography imaging is used widely in oncologic practice for lung tumor characterization. Usually, we interpret the image on the basis of visual assessment; there are features, however, within each image that might not be perceived by the naked eye and require computer-aided techniques. Previous authors have shown the potential of quantitative CT-based texture analysis in differentiation of K-ras mutation from pan-wild type NSCLC.
that was published recently has explored the association between CT gray-level texture features and EGFR mutations in a relatively small sample size (25 patients with EGFR mutation and 20 patients with EGFR wild type). In this study, we present comprehensive radiomic analysis using semiautomatic segmentation in 298 peripheral lung adenocarcinomas. Two hundred nineteen radiomic features were extracted to assess the ability to predict EGFR mutation status. Considering that using too many features in the classification algorithm can lead to overfitting, in which noise or irrelevant features might exert undue influence on classification decisions, only features that are not associated with other features were selected for further analysis. With this approach, we found that 11 radiomic features from 7 different feature categories were significantly associated with EGFR mutations. Texture features, wavelet features, Laws features, and along with pixel statistical, have seen a resurgent use in medical images, especially CT and magnetic resonance images.
In our study we formed sets of 5 one-dimensional Laws filters, each designed to describe different structures in the image (E: edges, S: spots, R: ripple, W: waves, L: low pass). The wavelet transformation was limited to 2 levels (L) of decomposition on each of the 9 faces (C) on the 3-D tumor, with 2 types of metrics (P), namely, energy and entropy. Our statistical model finds Laws features L5L5S5 and wavelet P2L2C9 and P1L2C5 to be 1 of the 5 predictors of EGFR mutation status. Several previous studies
showed that EGFR mutation was associated with small tumor size. In our analysis, size-based features including longest diameter and short axis were not significant predictors for the EGFR mutation. We believe that this difference can be explained in part by the fact that most clinically assessed tumor diameters are manually drawn on the central slice of CT images and limited to 1 dimension of the tumor, and whole tumor volume was taken into account in the size-based radiomic features.
With logistic regression analysis, we identified that radiomic features could be served as an imaging surrogate for EGFR mutation, although the AUC of radiomic features alone was not as high as the model created with clinical features, they provide complementary information, as the combination results in an improved ROC curve (AUC, 0.709), and we were able to significantly increase the predictive performance of EGFR mutation. These findings suggested that the combination of radiomic data and demographic information in a system model is more effective.
There are some limitations in this study. One limitation is that this study is retrospective and limited to only Eastern Asian populations; care should be taken before generalizing our findings to other populations. Second, radiomic features were derived from semi-automatic segmentation by radiologists, which can be influenced by observers' subjective trend. However, the results of automatic boundary extraction method were not satisfactory for all the lesions, particularly in the case of tumors with GGO components, as their margins are usually unclear from the adjacent normal lung parenchyma. Furthermore, since atelectasis is common in patients with central lung cancers, and differentiation between them is rather difficult as both appear as solid density on CT, our analysis did not include central lung cancers. A prospective multi-Institutional study with a large patient cohort would be required to confirm our observations.
Conclusion
In summary, this study revealed associations between CT based radiomic features and EGFR mutation status in peripheral lung adenocarcinomas, and therefore non-invasive radiomic phenotype analysis has the potential to improve the differentiation of EGFR mutate from wild type when used in addition to clinical predictors.
Clinical Practice Points
•
The presence of activating EGFR mutations has been shown to be prognostic for a more favorable outcome to TKI therapy in lung adenocarcinomas.
•
Several reports have described the relationship between mutation status of EGFR and traditional radiological features. Radiomic-based approach allows high throughput extraction of quantitative parameters from CT images which beyond what is visually perceived by the human eyes. Thus, we hypothesized that radiomic analysis of routinely performed preoperative CT images could provide imaging biomarkers for EGFR mutations.
•
In this study we demonstrated that eleven CT based radiomic features have significant association with EGFR mutations. Adding radiomic features to clinical model could improve the predicting power of EGFR mutations, thus helping in formulating a better clinical decision without adding additional cost.
Disclosure
R.J.G. is a consultant and shareholder in HealthMyne, Inc, and oncology-specific PACS system. The remaining authors have stated that they have no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
We thank Zhongli Zhan (Department of Pathology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital) for doing histologic evaluation and EGFR mutation analysis.
This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute (grants U01 CA143062), Tianjin Science and Technology Major Project (No. 12ZCDZSY15500), and Public science and technology research funds projects of NHFPC of the P.R. China (No. 201402013). This work has been supported in part by the Biostatistics Core Facility at the Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, a National Cancer Institute designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (5P30CA076292-16).
Supplemental Data
Supplemental Table 1Quantitative Radiomic Features
Feature Category
Feature Index
Description of the Features
C1. Tumor Size
F1
Longest diameter, mm
F 2
ShortAx-LongDia
F 3
Short axis, mm
F 6
Vol-cm3
F 33
Area-Pxl
F 34
Volume-Pxl
F 35
Num-Pxl
F 36
Width-Pxl
F 37
Thickness-Pxl
F 38
Length-Pxl
F 39
Length-by-Thick
F 40
Length-by-Width
F 41
Border-Leng-Pxl
C2. Tumor Shape (Roundness)
F 7
5a-3D-MacSpic
F 13
9b-3D-Circularity
F 14
9c-3D-Compactness
F 23
Asymmetry
F 24
Compactness
F 26
Elliptic Fit
F 28
Radius of largest enclosed ellipse
F 29
Radius of smallest enclosed ellipse
F 30
Shape-Index
F 31
Roundness
F 32
Rectangular fit
C3. Tumor Location
F 8
8a-3D-Attch-Pleural wall
F 9
8b-3D-Border-to-Lung
F 10
8c-3D-Border-to-Pleural wall
F 11
8d-3D-Ratio-Free-to-Attach
F 12
9a-3D-FractionalAnisotropy
F 15
9d-3D-AV-Dist-COG-to-Border
F 16
9e-3D-SD-Dist-COG-to-Border
F 17
9f-3D-Min-Dist-COG-to-Border
F 18
9g-3D-Max-Dist-COG-to-Border
F 27
Main Direction
C4. Airspace
F 19
10a_3D_Relative_Volume_AirSpaces
F 20
10b_3D_Number_AirSpaces
F 21
10c_3D_Av_Volume_AirSpaces
F 22
10d_3D_SD_Volume_AirSpaces
C5. Pixel Intensity Histogram
F 4
Mean, Hounsfield Units
F 5
StdDev [HU]
F 184
Histogram-Mean-Layer 1
F 185
Histogram-SD-Layer 1
F 186
Histogram-Energy-Layer 1
F 187
Histogram-Entropy-Layer 1
F 188
Histogram-Kurt-Layer 1
F 189
Histogram-Skew-Layer 1
F 25
Density
C6. Run Length and Co-occurrence
F 42
AvgCoocurrence-Homo
F 43
AvgCoocurrence-Mp
F 44
AvgCoocurrence-Constrast
F 45
AvgCoocurrence-Energy
F 46
AvgCoocurrence-Entropy
F 47
AvgCoocurrence-Mean
F 48
AvgGLN
F 49
AvgHGRE
F 50
AvgLGRE
F 51
AvgLRE
F 52
AvgLRHGE
F 53
AvgLRLGE
F 54
AvgRLN
F 55
AvgRP
F 56
AvgSRE
F 57
AvgSRHGE
F 58
AvgSRLGE
C7. Laws Texture Feature (With Different Convolution Filters)
F 59
3-D Laws features E5 E5 E5 Layer 1
F 60
3-D Laws features E5 E5 L5 Layer 1
F 61
3-D Laws features E5 E5 R5 Layer 1
F 62
3-D Laws features E5 E5 S5 Layer 1
F 63
3-D Laws features E5 E5 W5 Layer 1
F 64
3-D Laws features E5 L5 E5 Layer 1
F 65
3-D Laws features E5 L5 L5 Layer 1
F 66
3-D Laws features E5 L5 R5 Layer 1
F 67
3-D Laws features E5 L5 S5 Layer 1
F 68
3-D Laws features E5 L5 W5 Layer 1
F 69
3-D Laws features E5 R5 E5 Layer 1
F 70
3-D Laws features E5 R5 L5 Layer 1
F 71
3-D Laws features E5 R5 R5 Layer 1
F 72
3-D Laws features E5 R5 S5 Layer 1
F 73
3-D Laws features E5 R5 W5 Layer 1
F 74
3-D Laws features E5 S5 E5 Layer 1
F 75
3-D Laws features E5 S5 L5 Layer 1
F 76
3-D Laws features E5 S5 R5 Layer 1
F 77
3-D Laws features E5 S5 S5 Layer 1
F 78
3-D Laws features E5 S5 W5 Layer 1
F 79
3-D Laws features E5 W5 E5 Layer 1
F 80
3-D Laws features E5 W5 L5 Layer 1
F 81
3-D Laws features E5 W5 R5 Layer 1
F 82
3-D Laws features E5 W5 S5 Layer 1
F 83
3-D Laws features E5 W5 W5 Layer 1
F 84
3-D Laws features L5 E5 E5 Layer 1
F 85
3-D Laws features L5 E5 L5 Layer 1
F 86
3-D Laws features L5 E5 R5 Layer 1
F 87
3-D Laws features L5 E5 S5 Layer 1
F 88
3-D Laws features L5 E5 W5 Layer 1
F 89
3-D Laws features L5 L5 E5 Layer 1
F 90
3-D Laws features L5 L5 L5 Layer 1
F 91
3-D Laws features L5 L5 R5 Layer 1
F 92
3-D Laws features L5 L5 S5 Layer 1
F 93
3-D Laws features L5 L5 W5 Layer 1
F 94
3-D Laws features L5 R5 E5 Layer 1
F 95
3-D Laws features L5 R5 L5 Layer 1
F 96
3-D Laws features L5 R5 R5 Layer 1
F 97
3-D Laws features L5 R5 S5 Layer 1
F 98
3-D Laws features L5 R5 W5 Layer 1
F 99
3-D Laws features L5 S5 E5 Layer 1
F 100
3-D Laws features L5 S5 L5 Layer 1
F 101
3-D Laws features L5 S5 R5 Layer 1
F 102
3-D Laws features L5 S5 S5 Layer 1
F 103
3-D Laws features L5 S5 W5 Layer 1
F 104
3-D Laws features L5 W5 E5 Layer 1
F 105
3-D Laws features L5 W5 L5 Layer 1
F 106
3-D Laws features L5 W5 R5 Layer 1
F 107
3-D Laws features L5 W5 S5 Layer 1
F 108
3-D Laws features L5 W5 W5 Layer 1
F 109
3-D Laws features R5 E5 E5 Layer 1
F 110
3-D Laws features R5 E5 L5 Layer 1
F 111
3-D Laws features R5 E5 R5 Layer 1
F 112
3-D Laws features R5 E5 S5 Layer 1
F 113
3-D Laws features R5 E5 W5 Layer 1
F 114
3-D Laws features R5 L5 E5 Layer 1
F 115
3-D Laws features R5 L5 L5 Layer 1
F 116
3-D Laws features R5 L5 R5 Layer 1
F 117
3-D Laws features R5 L5 S5 Layer 1
F 118
3-D Laws features R5 L5 W5 Layer 1
F 119
3-D Laws features R5 R5 E5 Layer 1
F 120
3-D Laws features R5 R5 L5 Layer 1
F 121
3-D Laws features R5 R5 R5 Layer 1
F 122
3-D Laws features R5 R5 S5 Layer 1
F 123
3-D Laws features R5 R5 W5 Layer 1
F 124
3-D Laws features R5 S5 E5 Layer 1
F 125
3-D Laws features R5 S5 L5 Layer 1
F 126
3-D Laws features R5 S5 R5 Layer 1
F 127
3-D Laws features R5 S5 S5 Layer 1
F 128
3-D Laws features R5 S5 W5 Layer 1
F 129
3-D Laws features R5 W5 E5 Layer 1
F 130
3-D Laws features R5 W5 L5 Layer 1
F 131
3-D Laws features R5 W5 R5 Layer 1
F 132
3-D Laws features R5 W5 S5 Layer 1
F 133
3-D Laws features R5 W5 W5 Layer 1
F 134
3-D Laws features S5 E5 E5 Layer 1
F 135
3-D Laws features S5 E5 L5 Layer 1
F 136
3-D Laws features S5 E5 R5 Layer 1
F 137
3-D Laws features S5 E5 S5 Layer 1
F 138
3-D Laws features S5 E5 W5 Layer 1
F 139
3-D Laws features S5 L5 E5 Layer 1
F 140
3-D Laws features S5 L5 L5 Layer 1
F 141
3-D Laws features S5 L5 R5 Layer 1
F 142
3-D Laws features S5 L5 S5 Layer 1
F 143
3-D Laws features S5 L5 W5 Layer 1
F 144
3-D Laws features S5 R5 E5 Layer 1
F 145
3-D Laws features S5 R5 L5 Layer 1
F 146
3-D Laws features S5 R5 R5 Layer 1
F 147
3-D Laws features S5 R5 S5 Layer 1
F 148
3-D Laws features S5 R5 W5 Layer 1
F 149
3-D Laws features S5 S5 E5 Layer 1
F 150
3-D Laws features S5 S5 L5 Layer 1
F 151
3-D Laws features S5 S5 R5 Layer 1
F 152
3-D Laws features S5 S5 S5 Layer 1
F 153
3-D Laws features S5 S5 W5 Layer 1
F 154
3-D Laws features S5 W5 E5 Layer 1
F 155
3-D Laws features S5 W5 L5 Layer 1
F 156
3-D Laws features S5 W5 R5 Layer 1
F 157
3-D Laws features S5 W5 S5 Layer 1
F 158
3-D Laws features S5 W5 W5 Layer 1
F 159
3-D Laws features W5 E5 E5 Layer 1
F 160
3-D Laws features W5 E5 L5 Layer 1
F 161
3-D Laws features W5 E5 R5 Layer 1
F 162
3-D Laws features W5 E5 S5 Layer 1
F 163
3-D Laws features W5 E5 W5 Layer 1
F 164
3-D Laws features W5 L5 E5 Layer 1
F 165
3-D Laws features W5 L5 L5 Layer 1
F 166
3-D Laws features W5 L5 R5 Layer 1
F 167
3-D Laws features W5 L5 S5 Layer 1
F 168
3-D Laws features W5 L5 W5 Layer 1
F 169
3-D Laws features W5 R5 E5 Layer 1
F 170
3-D Laws features W5 R5 L5 Layer 1
F 171
3-D Laws features W5 R5 R5 Layer 1
F 172
3-D Laws features W5 R5 S5 Layer 1
F 173
3-D Laws features W5 S5 E5 Layer 1
F 174
3-D Laws features W5 S5 L5 Layer 1
F 175
3-D Laws features W5 R5 W5 Layer 1
F 176
3-D Laws features W5 S5 R5 Layer 1
F 177
3-D Laws features W5 S5 S5 Layer 1
F 178
3-D Laws features W5 S5 W5 Layer 1
F 179
3-D Laws features W5 W5 E5 Layer 1
F 180
3-D Laws features W5 W5 L5 Layer 1
F 181
3-D Laws features W5 W5 R5 Layer 1
F 182
3-D Laws features W5 W5 S5 Layer 1
F 183
3-D Laws features W5 W5 W5 Layer 1
C8. Wavelets Texture (Feature At Different Layers)
Impact of epidermal growth factor receptor and KRAS mutations on clinical outcomes in previously untreated non–small-cell lung cancer patients: results of an online tumor registry of clinical trials.
Clinical course of patients with non–small-cell lung cancer and epidermal growth factor receptor exon 19 and exon 21 mutations treated with gefitinib or erlotinib.
LUX-Lung 3: a randomized, open-label, phase III study of afatinib versus pemetrexed and cisplatin as first-line treatment for patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung harboring EGFR-activating mutations.
First-line gefitinib versus first-line chemotherapy by carboplatin (CBDCA) plus paclitaxel (TXL) in non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (pts) with EGFR mutations: a phase III study (002) by North East Japan Gefitinib Study Group.
Gefitinib versus cisplatin plus docetaxel in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer harbouring mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (WJTOG3405): an open label, randomised phase 3 trial.
Imaging characteristics of stage I non–small-cell lung cancer on CT and FDG-PET: relationship with epidermal growth factor receptor protein expression status and survival.
Texture analysis of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) on contrast-enhanced computed tomography: prediction of the response to the first-line chemotherapy.
International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society: international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma: executive summary.
Routine EGFR molecular analysis in non–small-cell lung cancer patients is feasible: exons 18–21 sequencing results of 753 patients and subsequent clinical outcomes.
30005-5&id=gr1.jpg){kind=link}
30005-5&id=gr2.jpg){kind=link}