Can Radiomics Analyses in 18
F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary
Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?

BAKIRARAR, Batuhan; SOYDAL, Çiğdem; Dizbay Sak, Serpil; Kirmizi, Ayca; GÜNDÜZ, Pınar; ÖZKAN, Elgin; ARAZ, Mine

doi:10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140

Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?

Mine Araz, (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Nükleer Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Çiğdem Soydal, (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Nükleer Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Pınar Gündüz, (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Nükleer Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Ayça Kırmızı, (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Patoloji Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Batuhan Bakırarar, (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Biyoistatistik Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Serpil Dizbay Sak, (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Patoloji Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Elgin Özkan (Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Nükleer Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy

7 1

Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 31 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 49 - 56 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140 İndeks Tarihi: 09-06-2022

Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?

Öz:

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the role of preoperative 18 fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) positron emission tomography/ computed tomography (PET/CT) radiomics features and metabolic parameters of primary breast tumors in predicting hormone receptor (HR) positivity. Methods: A total of 153 patients with breast carcinoma who underwent preoperative18 F-FDG PET/CT were included. All PET/CT images were retrospectively reevaluated. Radiomics features of primary breast lesions reflecting tumor heterogeneity as well as standardized uptake value (SUV) metrics (SUVmin , SUVmean , SUVmax , and SUVpeak ) and volumetric parameters such as metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were extracted by commercial texture analysis software package (LIFEx; https://www.lifexsoft.org/ index.php). WEKA and SPSS were used for statistical analysis. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to determine texture features predicting HR positivity. Accuracy, F-measure, precision, recall, and precision-recall curve area were used as data-mining performance criteria of texture features to predict HR positivity. Results: None of the radiomics parameters were significant in predicting HR status. Only SUV metrics and TLG were statistically important. Mean ± standard deviations for SUVmean , SUVmax , and SUVpeak for the HR-negative group were significantly higher than those in the HR-positive group (6.73±4.36 vs. 5.20±3.32, p=0.027; 11.55±7.42 vs. 8.63±5.23, p=0.006; and 8.37±6.81 vs. 5.72±4.86; p=0.012). Cut-off values of SUVmean , SUVmax , and SUVpeak for the prediction of HR positivity were 4.93, 8.35, and 6.02, respectively. Among data-mining methods, logistic regression showed the best performance with accuracy of 0.762. Conclusion: In addition to the relatively limited number of patients in this study, radiomics parameters cannot predict the HR status of primary breast cancer. SUV levels of the HR-negative group were significantly higher than those of the HR-positive group. To clarify the role of metabolic and radiomics parameters in predicting HR status in breast cancer, further studies involving a larger study population are needed.

Anahtar Kelime:

Meme Kanserinde Primer Tümöre Ait 18 F-FDG PET/BT Radiomics Parametreleri Hormon Reseptörleri Durumunu Öngörebilir mi?

Öz:

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı preoperative 18 flor-florodeoksiglukoz (18 F-FDG) pozitron emisyon tomografisi/bilgisayarlı tomografi (PET/BT) radiomics ve metabolik parametrelerinin primer meme tümörünün hormon reseptör (HR) pozitifliğini öngörmedeki rolünün araştırılmasıdır. Yöntem: Preoperatif 18 F-FDG PET/BT yapılan 153 meme kanseri hastası dahil edildi. Tüm PET/BT görüntüleri retrospektif olarak yeniden değerlendirildi. Primer meme tümörünün tümör heterojenitesini yansıtan radiomics parametrelerinin yanında standardize alım değeri (SUV) ölçümleri (SUVmin , SUVortalama , SUVmaks , SUVpeak ) ve volümetrik parametreler [metabolik tümör hacmi ve toplam lezyon glikoliz (TLG)] doku analizi yazılım programı (LIFEx) (https://www.lifexsoft.org/ index.php) ile çıkarıldı. İstatistiksel analiz için WEKA ve SPSS kullanıldı. öngörülmesi için Binary lojistik regresyon analizi kullanıldı. Doğruluk, F-measure, kesinlik, recall ve precision-recall curve HR pozitifliğini öngörmede doku parametrelerinin veri madenciliği performans kriterleri olarak kullanıldı. Bulgular: HR durumunun öngörülmesinde hiçbir radiomics parametresi anlamlı bulunmadı. Sadece SUV ölçümleri ve TLG anlamlı bulundu. HR negatif grupta pozitif gruba göre ortalama SUVortalama , SUVmaks and SUVpeak değerleri istatistiksel olarak yüksek bulundu (6,73±4,36’ya karşı 5,20±3,32 p=0,027, 11,55±7,42’ye karşı 8,63±5,23 p=0,006 ve 8,37±6,81’e karşı 5,72±4,86 p=0,012). SUVortalama , SUVmaks and SUVpeak için HR pozitifliğini öngörmede eşik değerler sırasıyla 4,93, 8,35 ve 6,02’ydi. Veri madenciliği yöntemleri içinde lojistik regresyon 0,762 doğruluk ile en iyi performansı gösterdi. Sonuç: Bu çalışmada kısıtlı hasta sayısı olmakla birlikte, radiomics parametreleri primer meme kanserinde HR durumunu öngöremedi. HR negatif grupta, pozitif gruba göre SUV değerleri anlamlı olarak daha yüksekti. Metabolik parametrelerin ve radiomics parametrelerinin meme kanserinde HR durumunu öngörmedeki yerinin netleşebilmesi için daha fazla sayıda hasta içeren ileri çalışmalara ihtiyaç vardır.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Harvey JM, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Allred DC. Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1474-1481.
2. Yoon HJ, Kim Y, Kim BS. Intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity predicts invasive components in breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Eur Radiol 2015;25:3648-3658.
3. Garcia-Vicente AM, Pérez-Beteta J, Pérez-García VM, Molina D, Jiménez- Londoño GA, Soriano-Castrejón A, Martínez-González A. Metabolic tumor burden assessed by dual time point [18F]FDG PET/CT in locally advanced breast cancer: relation with tumor biology. Mol Imaging Biol 2017;19:636-644.
4. Moscoso A, Ruibal Á, Domínguez-Prado I, Fernández-Ferreiro A, Herranz M, Albaina L, Argibay S, Silva-Rodríguez J, Pardo-Montero J, Aguiar P. Texture analysis of high-resolution dedicated breast 18 F-FDG PET images correlates with immunohistochemical factors and subtype of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018;45:196-206.
5. Ha S, Park S, Bang JI, Kim EK, Lee HY. Metabolic radiomics for pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT to characterize locally advanced breast cancer: histopathologic characteristics, response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and prognosis. Sci Rep 2017;7:1556.
6. Antunovic L, Gallivanone F, Sollini M, Sagona A, Invento A, Manfrinato G, Kirienko M, Tinterri C, Chiti A, Castiglioni I. [18F]FDG PET/CT features for the molecular characterization of primary breast tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;44:1945-1954.
7. Acar E, Turgut B, Yiğit S, Kaya G. Comparison of the volumetric and radiomics findings of 18F-FDG PET/CT images with immunohistochemical prognostic factors in local/locally advanced breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2019;40:764-772.
8. Molina-García D, García-Vicente AM, Pérez-Beteta J, Amo-Salas M, Martínez-González A, Tello-Galán MJ, Soriano-Castrejón Á, Pérez-García VM. Intratumoral heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT by textural analysis in breast cancer as a predictive and prognostic subrogate. Ann Nucl Med 2018;32:379-388.
9. Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, Carvalho S, van Stiphout RG, Granton P, Zegers CM, Gillies R, Boellard R, Dekker A, Aerts HJ. Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer 2012;48:441-446.
10. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology 2016;278:563-577.
11. Allison KH, Hammond MEH, Dowsett M, McKernin SE, Carey LA, Fitzgibbons PL, Hayes DF, Lakhani SR, Chavez-MacGregor M, Perlmutter J, Perou CM, Regan MM, Rimm DL, Symmans WF, Torlakovic EE, Varella L, Viale G, Weisberg TF, McShane LM, Wolff AC. Estrogen and progesterone receptor testing in breast cancer: ASCO/CAP guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:1346-1366.
12. Røge R, Nielsen S, Riber-Hansen R, Vyberg M. Ki-67 proliferation index in breast cancer as a function of assessment method: a NordiQC experience. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2021;29:99-104.
13. Pertschuk LP, Kim DS, Nayer K, Feldman JG, Eisenberg KB, Carter AC, Rong ZT, Thelmo WL, Fleisher J, Greene GL. Immunocytochemical estrogen and progestin receptor assays in breast cancer with monoclonal antibodies. Histopathologic, demographic, and biochemical correlations and relationship to endocrine response and survival. Cancer 1990;66:1663-1670.
14. Mayerhoefer ME, Materka A, Langs G, Häggström I, Szczypiński P, Gibbs P, Cook G. Introduction to radiomics. J Nucl Med 2020;61:488-495.
15. Lemarignier C, Martineau A, Teixeira L, Vercellino L, Espié M, Merlet P, Groheux D. Correlation between tumour characteristics, SUV measurements, metabolic tumour volume, TLG and textural features assessed with 18F-FDG PET in a large cohort of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;44:1145-1154.
16. Thie JA. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1431-1434.
17. Nakamoto Y, Zasadny KR, Minn H, Wahl RL. Reproducibility of common semi-quantitative parameters for evaluating lung cancer glucose metabolism with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-[18F] fluoro-D-glucose. Mol Imaging Biol 2002;4:171-178.
18. Keyes JW Jr. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995;36:1836-1839.
19. Moon SH, Hyun SH, Choi JY. Prognostic significance of volume-based PET parameters in cancer patients. Korean J Radiol 2013;14:1-12.
20. Sollini M, Cozzi L, Ninatti G, Antunovic L, Cavinato L, Chiti A, Kirienko M. PET/CT radiomics in breast cancer: mind the step. Methods 2021;188:122-132.
21. Hua J, Xiong Z, Lowey J, Suh E, Dougherty ER. Optimal number of features as a function of sample size for various classification rules. Bioinformatics 2005;21:1509-1515.
22. AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) Cancer Staging Manual; 8th edition, 3rd printing, Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, et al (Eds), Springer, Chicago 2018

APA	ARAZ M, SOYDAL Ç, GÜNDÜZ P, Kirmizi A, BAKIRARAR B, Dizbay Sak S, ÖZKAN E (2022). Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. , 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
Chicago	ARAZ Mine,SOYDAL Çiğdem,GÜNDÜZ Pınar,Kirmizi Ayca,BAKIRARAR Batuhan,Dizbay Sak Serpil,ÖZKAN Elgin Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. (2022): 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
MLA	ARAZ Mine,SOYDAL Çiğdem,GÜNDÜZ Pınar,Kirmizi Ayca,BAKIRARAR Batuhan,Dizbay Sak Serpil,ÖZKAN Elgin Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. , 2022, ss.49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
AMA	ARAZ M,SOYDAL Ç,GÜNDÜZ P,Kirmizi A,BAKIRARAR B,Dizbay Sak S,ÖZKAN E Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. . 2022; 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
Vancouver	ARAZ M,SOYDAL Ç,GÜNDÜZ P,Kirmizi A,BAKIRARAR B,Dizbay Sak S,ÖZKAN E Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. . 2022; 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
IEEE	ARAZ M,SOYDAL Ç,GÜNDÜZ P,Kirmizi A,BAKIRARAR B,Dizbay Sak S,ÖZKAN E "Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?." , ss.49 - 56, 2022. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
ISNAD	ARAZ, Mine vd. "Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?". (2022), 49-56. https://doi.org/10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140

APA	ARAZ M, SOYDAL Ç, GÜNDÜZ P, Kirmizi A, BAKIRARAR B, Dizbay Sak S, ÖZKAN E (2022). Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy, 31(1), 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
Chicago	ARAZ Mine,SOYDAL Çiğdem,GÜNDÜZ Pınar,Kirmizi Ayca,BAKIRARAR Batuhan,Dizbay Sak Serpil,ÖZKAN Elgin Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy 31, no.1 (2022): 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
MLA	ARAZ Mine,SOYDAL Çiğdem,GÜNDÜZ Pınar,Kirmizi Ayca,BAKIRARAR Batuhan,Dizbay Sak Serpil,ÖZKAN Elgin Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy, vol.31, no.1, 2022, ss.49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
AMA	ARAZ M,SOYDAL Ç,GÜNDÜZ P,Kirmizi A,BAKIRARAR B,Dizbay Sak S,ÖZKAN E Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy. 2022; 31(1): 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
Vancouver	ARAZ M,SOYDAL Ç,GÜNDÜZ P,Kirmizi A,BAKIRARAR B,Dizbay Sak S,ÖZKAN E Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy. 2022; 31(1): 49 - 56. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
IEEE	ARAZ M,SOYDAL Ç,GÜNDÜZ P,Kirmizi A,BAKIRARAR B,Dizbay Sak S,ÖZKAN E "Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?." Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy, 31, ss.49 - 56, 2022. 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140
ISNAD	ARAZ, Mine vd. "Can Radiomics Analyses in 18 F-FDG PET/CT Images of Primary Breast Carcinoma Predict Hormone Receptor Status?". Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy 31/1 (2022), 49-56. https://doi.org/10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.59140