4.7 Article

Defining a Radiomic Response Phenotype: A Pilot Study using targeted therapy in NSCLC

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep33860

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health [NIH-USA U24CA194354, U01CA140207, R01CA149490, NIH-USA U01CA190234]
  2. Kaye Family translational Research Fund
  3. Dutch Cancer Society [KWF UM 2009-4454]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Medical imaging plays a fundamental role in oncology and drug development, by providing a non-invasive method to visualize tumor phenotype. Radiomics can quantify this phenotype comprehensively by applying image-characterization algorithms, and may provide important information beyond tumor size or burden. In this study, we investigated if radiomics can identify a gefitinib response-phenotype, studying high-resolution computed-tomography (CT) imaging of forty-seven patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer before and after three weeks of therapy. On the baseline-scan, radiomic-feature Laws-Energy was significantly predictive for EGFR-mutation status (AUC = 0.67, p = 0.03), while volume (AUC = 0.59, p = 0.27) and diameter (AUC = 0.56, p = 0.46) were not. Although no features were predictive on the post-treatment scan (p > 0.08), the change in features between the two scans was strongly predictive (significant feature AUC-range = 0.74-0.91). A technical validation revealed that the associated features were also highly stable for test-retest (mean +/- std: ICC = 0.96 +/- 0.06). This pilot study shows that radiomic data before treatment is able to predict mutation status and associated gefitinib response non-invasively, demonstrating the potential of radiomics-based phenotyping to improve the stratification and response assessment between tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sensitive and resistant patient populations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available