4.4 Article

Neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy response prediction using MRI based ensemble learning method in rectal cancer patients

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.03.013

Keywords

MRI; Radiomics; Machine learning; Rectal cancer; Chemoradiotherapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate and validate the performance of individual and ensemble machine learning models (EMLMs) based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to predict neo-adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT) response in rectal cancer patients. We also aimed to study the effect of Laplacian of Gaussian (LOG) filter on EMLMs predictive performance. Methods: 98 rectal cancer patients were divided into a training (n = 53) and a validation set (n = 45). All patients underwent MRI a week before nCRT. Several features from intensity, shape and texture feature sets were extracted from MR images. SVM, Bayesian network, neural network and KNN classifiers were used individually and together for response prediction. Predictive performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). Results: Patients' nCRT responses included 17 patients with Grade 0, 28 with Grade 1, 34 with Grade 2, and 19 with Grade 3 according to AJCC/CAP pathologic grading. In without preprocessing MR Image the best result was for Bayesian network classifier with AUC and accuracy of 75.2% and 80.9% respectively, which was confirmed in the validation set with an AUC and accuracy of 74% and 79% respectively. In EMLMs the best result was for 4 (SVM.NN.BN .KNN) classifier EMLM with AUC and accuracy of 97.8% and 92.8% in testing and 95% and 90% in validation set respectively. Conclusions: In conclusion, we observed that machine learning methods can used to predict nCRT response in patients with rectal cancer. Preprocessing LOG filters and EL models can improve the prediction process.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available