Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep;52(3):873-882.
doi: 10.1002/jmri.27111. Epub 2020 Feb 29.

Preoperative MRI-Based Radiomic Machine-Learning Nomogram May Accurately Distinguish Between Benign and Malignant Soft-Tissue Lesions: A Two-Center Study

Affiliations

Preoperative MRI-Based Radiomic Machine-Learning Nomogram May Accurately Distinguish Between Benign and Malignant Soft-Tissue Lesions: A Two-Center Study

Hexiang Wang et al. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2020 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Preoperative differentiation between malignant and benign soft-tissue masses is important for treatment decisions.

Purpose/hypothesis: To construct/validate a radiomics-based machine method for differentiation between malignant and benign soft-tissue masses.

Study type: Retrospective.

Population: In all, 206 cases.

Field strength/sequence: The T1 sequence was acquired with the following range of parameters: relaxation time / echo time (TR/TE), 352-550/2.75-19 msec. The T2 sequence was acquired with the following parameters: TR/TE, 700-6370/40-120 msec. The data were divided into a 3.0T training cohort, a 1.5T MR validation cohort, and a 3.0T external validationcohort.

Assessment: Twelve machine-learning methods were trained to establish classification models to predict the likelihood of malignancy of each lesion. The data of 206 cases were separated into a training set (n = 69) and two validation sets (n = 64, 73, respectively).

Statistical tests: 1) Demographic characteristics: a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was performed for continuous variables as appropriate. The χ2 test or Fisher's exact test was performed for comparing categorical variables as appropriate. 2) The performance of four feature selection methods (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator [LASSO], Boruta, Recursive feature elimination [RFE, and minimum redundancy maximum relevance [mRMR]) and three classifiers (support vector machine [SVM], generalized linear models [GLM], and random forest [RF]) were compared for selecting the likelihood of malignancy of each lesion. The performance of the radiomics model was assessed using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and accuracy (ACC) values.

Results: The LASSO feature method + RF classifier achieved the highest AUC of 0.86 and 0.82 in the two validation cohorts. The nomogram achieved AUCs of 0.96 and 0.88, respectively, in the two validation sets, which was higher than that of the radiomic algorithm in the two validation sets and clinical model of the validation 1 set (0.92, 0.88 respectively). The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the radiomics nomogram were 90.5%, 100%, and 80.6%, respectively, for validation set 1; and 80.8%, 75.8%, and 85.0% for validation set 2.

Data conclusion: A machine-learning nomogram based on radiomics was accurate for distinguishing between malignant and benign soft-tissue masses.

Evidence level: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:873-882.

Keywords: diagnosis; differential; magnetic resonance imaging; soft tissue neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rastrelli M, Tropea S, Basso U, Roma A, Maruzzo M, Rossi CR. Soft tissue limb and trunk sarcomas: Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Anticancer Res 2014;34(10):5251-5262.
    1. Casali PG, Blay JY, ESMO/CONTICANET/EUROBONET Consensus Panel of experts. Soft tissue sarcomas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2010;21(Suppl 5):v198-v203.
    1. de Schepper AM, Vanhoenacker FM, Parizel PM, Gielen JL. Imaging of soft tissue tumors. 2nd ed.Berlin: Springer; 2005.
    1. Fletcher CD, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn P, Mertens FJ. WHO classification of tumors of soft tissue and bone. 4th ed.Lyon, France: IARC; 2013.
    1. Crim JR, Seeger LL, Yao L, Chandnani V, Eckardt JJ. Diagnosis of soft-tissue masses with MR imaging: Can benign masses be differentiated from malignant ones? Radiology 1992;185(2):581-586.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources