Back

Reproducibility test of radiomics using network analysis and Wasserstein K-means algorithm

Oh, J. H.; Apte, A.; Katsoulakis, E.; Riaz, N.; Hatzoglou, V.; Yu, Y.; Leeman, J.; Mahmood, U.; Pouryahya, M.; Iyer, A.; Shukla-Dave, A.; Tannenbaum, A.; Lee, N.; Deasy, J.

2019-09-19 biophysics
10.1101/773168 bioRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeTo construct robust and validated radiomic predictive models, the development of a reliable method that can identify reproducible radiomic features robust to varying image acquisition methods and other scanner parameters should be preceded with rigorous validation. Due to the property of high correlation present between radiomic features, we hypothesize that reproducible radiomic features across different datasets that are obtained from different image acquisition settings preserve some level of connectivity between features in the form of a network.\n\nMethodsWe propose a regularized partial correlation network to identify robust and reproducible radiomic features. This approach was tested on two radiomic feature sets generated with two different reconstruction methods from a cohort of 47 lung cancer patients. The commonality of the resulting two networks was assessed. A largest common network component from the two networks was tested on phantom data consisting of 5 cancer samples. We further propose a novel K-means algorithm coupled with the optimal mass transport (OMT) theory to cluster samples. This approach following the regularized partial correlation analysis was tested on computed tomography (CT) scans from 77 head and neck cancer patients that were downloaded from The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) and validated on CT scans from 83 head and neck cancer patients treated at our institution.\n\nResultsCommon radiomic features were found in relatively large network components between the resulting two partial correlation networks from a cohort of 47 lung cancer patients. The similarity of network components in terms of the common number of radiomic features was statistically significant. For phantom data, the Wasserstein distance on a largest common network component from the lung cancer data was much smaller than the Wasserstein distance on the same network using random radiomic features, implying the reliability of those radiomic features present in the network. Further analysis using the proposed Wasserstein K-means algorithm on TCIA head and neck cancer data showed that the resulting clusters separate tumor subsites and this was validated on our institution data.\n\nConclusionsWe showed that a network-based analysis enables identifying reproducible radiomic features. This was validated using phantom data and external data via the Wasserstein distance metric and the proposed Wasserstein K-means method.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Physics in Medicine & Biology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
35.7%
2
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.4%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.2%
50% of probability mass above
4
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 9%
7.0%
5
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.5%
6
IEEE Access
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.5%
7
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.2%
8
Journal of Biophotonics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
9
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
10
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
11
Statistics in Medicine
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
12
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
13
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
14
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
15
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
16
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
17
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
18
Biomedical Optics Express
95 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
19
Expert Systems with Applications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
20
Optics Letters
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.5%
21
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
22
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
102 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
23
European Radiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.5%
24
Bioengineering
29 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
25
Journal of Biomedical Optics
28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%