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
Multicenter Study
. 2024 Oct 4;25(1):785.
doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07903-2.

Utilizing radiomics techniques to isolate a single vertebral body from chest CT for opportunistic osteoporosis screening

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Utilizing radiomics techniques to isolate a single vertebral body from chest CT for opportunistic osteoporosis screening

Xiaocong Lin et al. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. .

Abstract

Purpose: Opportunistic osteoporosis screening, conducted during routine medical examinations such as chest computed tomography (CT), presents a potential solution for early detection. This study aims to investigate the feasibility of utilizing radiomics technology based on chest CT images to screen for opportunistic osteoporosis.

Methods: This Study is a Multicenter Retrospective Investigation. Relevant clinical data, including demographics and DXA results, would be collected for each participant. The radiomics analysis in this study focuses on the extraction of features from the 11th or 12th thoracic vertebral bodies from chest CT images. SVM machine learning models would be trained using these radiomic features, with DXA results as the ground truth for osteoporosis classification.

Results: In the training group, Clinical models had an accuracy of 0.684 and an AUC of 0.744, Radiomics models had an accuracy of 0.828 and an AUC of 0.896, Nomogram models had an accuracy of 0.839 and an AUC of 0.901. In the internal validation group, Clinical models had an accuracy of 0.769 and an AUC of 0.829, Radiomics models had an accuracy of 0.832 and an AUC of 0.892, Nomogram models had an accuracy of 0.839 and an AUC of 0.918. In the external validation group, Clinical models had an accuracy of 0.715 and an AUC of 0.741, Radiomics models had an accuracy of 0.777 and an AUC of 0.796, Nomogram models had an accuracy of 0.785 and an AUC of 0.807. In all three datasets, the Nomogram model exhibited a statistically significant difference in screening effectiveness compared to the clinical models.

Conclusion: Our research demonstrates that by leveraging radiomics features extracted from a single thoracic spine using chest CT, and incorporating these features with patient basic information, opportunistic screening for osteoporosis can be achieved.

Keywords: Chest CT; Osteoporosis; Radiomics; Thoracic vertebrae.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The process of patient inclusion
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The process of outlining ROI
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The process of feature extraction and selection. A. Visualization results of extracted radiomics features. B. Cluster analysis of extracted radiomics features
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The process of feature extraction and selection. A. Classification of radiomics features. B. C. LASSO regression. D. The final selected features
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
A.The ROC curves of the three models in the training group. B. The DCA curves of the three models in the training group. C. The calibration curves of the three models in the training group
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
A.The ROC curves of the three models in the training group. B. The DCA curves of the three models in the training group. C. The calibration curves of the three models in the training group
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
A.The ROC curves of the three models in the training group. B. The DCA curves of the three models in the training group. C. The calibration curves of the three models in the training group. D. A clinical column chart that can be used for clinical prediction

Similar articles

References

    1. Aibar-Almazán A, Voltes-Martínez A, Castellote-Caballero Y, Afanador-Restrepo DF, Carcelén-Fraile MDC, López-Ruiz E. Current status of the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(16):9465. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Coughlan T, Dockery F. Osteoporosis and fracture risk in older people. Clin Med (Lond). 2014;14(2):187–91. - PMC - PubMed
    1. LeBoff MS, Greenspan SL, Insogna KL, Lewiecki EM, Saag KG, Singer AJ, Siris ES. The clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(10):2049–102. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wan Y, Zeng F, Tan H, Lu Y, Zhang Y, Zhao L, You R. Cost-effectiveness analyses of denosumab for osteoporosis: a systematic review. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(5):979–1015. - PubMed
    1. O’Kelly J, Bartsch R, Kossack N, Borchert J, Pignot M, Hadji P. Real-world effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments in Germany. Arch Osteoporos. 2022;17(1):119. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types