Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, L0-148 Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sci Rep. 2022 Oct 6;12(1):16712. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-20703-9.
Radiomics in neuroimaging uses fully automatic segmentation to delineate the anatomical areas for which radiomic features are computed. However, differences among these segmentation methods affect radiomic features to an unknown extent. A scan-rescan dataset (n = 46) of T1-weighted and diffusion tensor images was used. Subjects were split into a sleep-deprivation and a control group. Scans were segmented using four segmentation methods from which radiomic features were computed. First, we measured segmentation agreement using the Dice-coefficient. Second, robustness and reproducibility of radiomic features were measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Last, difference in predictive power was assessed using the Friedman-test on performance in a radiomics-based sleep deprivation classification application. Segmentation agreement was generally high (interquartile range = 0.77-0.90) and median feature robustness to segmentation method variation was higher (ICC > 0.7) than scan-rescan reproducibility (ICC 0.3-0.8). However, classification performance differed significantly among segmentation methods (p < 0.001) ranging from 77 to 84%. Accuracy was higher for more recent deep learning-based segmentation methods. Despite high agreement among segmentation methods, subtle differences significantly affected radiomic features and their predictive power. Consequently, the effect of differences in segmentation methods should be taken into account when designing and evaluating radiomics-based research methods.
神经影像学中的放射组学使用全自动分割来描绘用于计算放射组学特征的解剖区域。然而,这些分割方法之间的差异在未知程度上影响了放射组学特征。使用 T1 加权和弥散张量图像的扫描-扫描数据集(n=46)。将受试者分为睡眠剥夺组和对照组。使用四种分割方法对扫描进行分割,从这些分割方法中计算出放射组学特征。首先,我们使用 Dice 系数测量分割一致性。其次,使用组内相关系数(ICC)测量放射组学特征的稳健性和可重复性。最后,使用 Friedman 检验评估在基于放射组学的睡眠剥夺分类应用中的性能差异。分割一致性通常较高(四分位距=0.77-0.90),并且中位数特征对分割方法变化的稳健性(ICC>0.7)高于扫描-扫描可重复性(ICC 0.3-0.8)。然而,分割方法之间的分类性能差异显著(p<0.001),范围从 77%到 84%。基于深度学习的最新分割方法的准确性更高。尽管分割方法之间具有高度一致性,但细微的差异会显著影响放射组学特征及其预测能力。因此,在设计和评估基于放射组学的研究方法时,应考虑分割方法差异的影响。