Co-clinical FDG-PET radiomic signature in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, ISSN: 1619-7089, Vol: 49, Issue: 2, Page: 550-562
2022
- 59Citations
- 17Usage
- 64Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations59
- Citation Indexes59
- 59
- CrossRef3
- Usage17
- Downloads12
- Abstract Views5
- Captures64
- Readers64
- 64
Article Description
Purpose: We sought to exploit the heterogeneity afforded by patient-derived tumor xenografts (PDX) to first, optimize and identify robust radiomic features to predict response to therapy in subtype-matched triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) PDX, and second, to implement PDX-optimized image features in a TNBC co-clinical study to predict response to therapy using machine learning (ML) algorithms. Methods: TNBC patients and subtype-matched PDX were recruited into a co-clinical FDG-PET imaging trial to predict response to therapy. One hundred thirty-one imaging features were extracted from PDX and human-segmented tumors. Robust image features were identified based on reproducibility, cross-correlation, and volume independence. A rank importance of predictors using ReliefF was used to identify predictive radiomic features in the preclinical PDX trial in conjunction with ML algorithms: classification and regression tree (CART), Naïve Bayes (NB), and support vector machines (SVM). The top four PDX-optimized image features, defined as radiomic signatures (RadSig), from each task were then used to predict or assess response to therapy. Performance of RadSig in predicting/assessing response was compared to SUV, SUV, and lean body mass-normalized SUL measures. Results: Sixty-four out of 131 preclinical imaging features were identified as robust. NB-RadSig performed highest in predicting and assessing response to therapy in the preclinical PDX trial. In the clinical study, the performance of SVM-RadSig and NB-RadSig to predict and assess response was practically identical and superior to SUV, SUV, and SUL measures. Conclusions: We optimized robust FDG-PET radiomic signatures (RadSig) to predict and assess response to therapy in the context of a co-clinical imaging trial.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85111515200&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05489-8; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34328530; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00259-021-05489-8; https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/oa_4/3052; https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4048&context=oa_4; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05489-8; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00259-021-05489-8
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know