Novel imaging techniques of rectal cancer: what do radiomics and radiogenomics have to offer? A literature review

Natally Horvat, David D B Bates, Iva Petkovska, Natally Horvat, David D B Bates, Iva Petkovska

Abstract

Introduction: As computational capabilities have advanced, radiologists and their collaborators have looked for novel ways to analyze diagnostic images. This has resulted in the development of radiomics and radiogenomics as new fields in medical imaging. Radiomics and radiogenomics may change the practice of medicine, particularly for patients with colorectal cancer. Radiomics corresponds to the extraction and analysis of numerous quantitative imaging features from conventional imaging modalities in correlation with several endpoints, including the prediction of pathology, genomics, therapeutic response, and clinical outcome. In radiogenomics, qualitative and/or quantitative imaging features are extracted and correlated with genetic profiles of the imaged tissue. Thus far, several studies have evaluated the use of radiomics and radiogenomics in patients with colorectal cancer; however, there are challenges to be overcome before its routine implementation including challenges related to sample size, model design and interpretability, and the lack of robust multicenter validation set.

Material and methods: In this article, we will review the concepts of radiomics and radiogenomics and their potential applications in rectal cancer.

Conclusion: Radiologists should be aware of the basic concepts, benefits, pitfalls, and limitations of new radiomic and radiogenomics techniques to achieve a balanced interpretation of the results.

Keywords: Computed tomography; Magnetic resonance imaging; Positron emission tomography; Radiogenomics; Radiomics; Rectal neoplasms.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Radiomics workflow.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
First-order statistical textural features.

References

    1. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data. Radiology. 2016;278(2):563–77.
    1. Wu W, Parmar C, Grossmann P, et al. Exploratory Study to Identify Radiomics Classifiers for Lung Cancer Histology. Front Oncol. 2016;6:71.
    1. Beig N, Khorrami M, Alilou M, et al. Perinodular and Intranodular Radiomic Features on Lung CT Images Distinguish Adenocarcinomas from Granulomas. Radiology. 2018:180910.
    1. Kickingereder P, Gotz M, Muschelli J, et al. Large-scale Radiomic Profiling of Recurrent Glioblastoma Identifies an Imaging Predictor for Stratifying Anti-Angiogenic Treatment Response. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(23):5765–71.
    1. Coroller TP, Agrawal V, Narayan V, et al. Radiomic phenotype features predict pathological response in non-small cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016;119(3):480–6.
    1. Horvat N, Veeraraghavan H, Khan M, et al. MR Imaging of Rectal Cancer: Radiomics Analysis to Assess Treatment Response after Neoadjuvant Therapy. Radiology. 2018;287(3):833–43.
    1. Andreassen CN, Alsner J, Overgaard J. Does variability in normal tissue reactions after radiotherapy have a genetic basis--where and how to look for it? Radiother Oncol. 2002;64(2):131–40.
    1. Pinker K, Shitano F, Sala E, et al. Background, current role, and potential applications of radiogenomics. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;47(3):604–20.
    1. Sala E, Mema E, Himoto Y, et al. Unravelling tumour heterogeneity using next-generation imaging: radiomics, radiogenomics, and habitat imaging. Clin Radiol. 2017;72(1):3–10.
    1. Ganeshan B, Miles KA. Quantifying tumour heterogeneity with CT. Cancer Imaging. 2013;13:140–9.
    1. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I. Textural Features for Image Classification. Ieee Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics. 1973;Smc3(6):610–21.
    1. Larue RT, Defraene G, De Ruysscher D, et al. Quantitative radiomics studies for tissue characterization: a review of technology and methodological procedures. Br J Radiol. 2017;90(1070):20160665.
    1. Berenguer R, Pastor-Juan MDR, Canales-Vázquez J, et al. Radiomics of CT Features May Be Nonreproducible and Redundant: Influence of CT Acquisition Parameters. Radiology. 2018;288(2):407–15.
    1. Lubner MG, Smith AD, Sandrasegaran K, et al. CT Texture Analysis: Definitions, Applications, Biologic Correlates, and Challenges. Radiographics. 2017;37(5):1483–503.
    1. Lubner MG, Stabo N, Abel EJ, et al. CT Textural Analysis of Large Primary Renal Cell Carcinomas: Pretreatment Tumor Heterogeneity Correlates With Histologic Findings and Clinical Outcomes. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207(1):96–105.
    1. Miles KA, Ganeshan B, Hayball MP. CT texture analysis using the filtration-histogram method: what do the measurements mean? Cancer Imaging. 2013;13(3):400–6.
    1. Chawla NV, Bowyer KW, Hall LO, Kegelmeyer WP. SMOTE: Synthetic minority over-sampling technique. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 2002;16:321–57.
    1. Fehr D, Veeraraghavan H, Wibmer A, et al. Automatic classification of prostate cancer Gleason scores from multiparametric magnetic resonance images. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(46):E6265–73.
    1. Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W, et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy: long-term results. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):711–7; discussion 7-8.
    1. Smith JJ, Strombom P, Chow OS, et al. Assessment of a Watch-and-Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer in Patients With a Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Therapy. JAMA Oncol. 2019:e185896.
    1. De Cecco CN, Ganeshan B, Ciolina M, et al. Texture analysis as imaging biomarker of tumoral response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer patients studied with 3-T magnetic resonance. Invest Radiol. 2015;50(4):239–45.
    1. De Cecco CN, Ciolina M, Caruso D, et al. Performance of diffusion-weighted imaging, perfusion imaging, and texture analysis in predicting tumoral response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer patients studied with 3T MR: initial experience. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41(9):1728–35.
    1. Meng Y, Zhang C, Zou S, et al. MRI texture analysis in predicting treatment response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer. Oncotarget. 2018;9(15):11999–2008.
    1. Aker M, Ganeshan B, Afaq A, et al. Magnetic Resonance Texture Analysis in Identifying Complete Pathological Response to Neoadjuvant Treatment in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2019;62(2):163–70.
    1. Horvat N, Veeraraghavan H, Khan M, et al. MR Imaging of Rectal Cancer: Radiomics Analysis to Assess Treatment Response after Neoadjuvant Therapy. Radiology. 2018:172300.
    1. Cusumano D, Dinapoli N, Boldrini L, et al. Fractal-based radiomic approach to predict complete pathological response after chemo-radiotherapy in rectal cancer. Radiol Med. 2017.
    1. Cui Y, Yang X, Shi Z, et al. Radiomics analysis of multiparametric MRI for prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2018.
    1. Bibault JE, Giraud P, Housset M, et al. Deep Learning and Radiomics predict complete response after neo-adjuvant chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):12611.
    1. Liu Z, Zhang XY, Shi YJ, et al. Radiomics Analysis for Evaluation of Pathological Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(23):7253–62.
    1. Nie K, Shi L, Chen Q, et al. Rectal Cancer: Assessment of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Outcome based on Radiomics of Multiparametric MRI. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(21):5256–64.
    1. Li W, Jiang Z, Guan Y, et al. Whole-lesion Apparent Diffusion Coefficient First- and Second-Order Texture Features for the Characterization of Rectal Cancer Pathological Factors. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2018;42(4):642–7.
    1. Chee CG, Kim YH, Lee KH, et al. CT texture analysis in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: A potential imaging biomarker for treatment response and prognosis. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0182883.
    1. Liang C, Huang Y, He L, et al. The development and validation of a CT-based radiomics signature for the preoperative discrimination of stage I-II and stage III-IV colorectal cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(21):31401–12.
    1. Sun Y, Hu P, Wang J, et al. Radiomic features of pretreatment MRI could identify T stage in patients with rectal cancer: Preliminary findings. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018.
    1. Huang YQ, Liang CH, He L, et al. Development and Validation of a Radiomics Nomogram for Preoperative Prediction of Lymph Node Metastasis in Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(18):2157–64.
    1. Chen LD, Liang JY, Wu H, et al. Multiparametric radiomics improve prediction of lymph node metastasis of rectal cancer compared with conventional radiomics. Life Sci. 2018;208:55–63.
    1. Huang Y, He L, Dong D, et al. Individualized prediction of perineural invasion in colorectal cancer: development and validation of a radiomics prediction model. Chin J Cancer Res. 2018;30(1):40–50.
    1. Huang X, Cheng Z, Huang Y, et al. CT-based Radiomics Signature to Discriminate High-grade From Low-grade Colorectal Adenocarcinoma. Acad Radiol. 2018;25(10):1285–97.
    1. van Helden EJ, Vacher YJL, van Wieringen WN, et al. Radiomics analysis of pre-treatment [Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(13):2307–17.
    1. Lovinfosse P, Polus M, Van Daele D, et al. FDG PET/CT radiomics for predicting the outcome of locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(3):365–75.
    1. Meng Y, Zhang Y, Dong D, et al. Novel radiomic signature as a prognostic biomarker for locally advanced rectal cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018.
    1. Jalil O, Afaq A, Ganeshan B, et al. Magnetic resonance based texture parameters as potential imaging biomarkers for predicting long-term survival in locally advanced rectal cancer treated by chemoradiotherapy. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19(4):349–62.
    1. Liu H, Zhang C, Wang L, et al. MRI radiomics analysis for predicting preoperative synchronous distant metastasis in patients with rectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2018.
    1. Aker M, Boone D, Chandramohan A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI in assessing tumor regression and identifying complete response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2018.
    1. Yang L, Dong D, Fang M, et al. Can CT-based radiomics signature predict KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mutations in colorectal cancer? Eur Radiol. 2018;28(5):2058–67.
    1. Meng X, Xia W, Xie P, et al. Preoperative radiomic signature based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for noninvasive evaluation of biological characteristics in rectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2018.
    1. Gourtsoyianni S, Doumou G, Prezzi D, et al. Primary Rectal Cancer: Repeatability of Global and Local-Regional MR Imaging Texture Features. Radiology. 2017;284(2):552–61.
    1. Badic B, Desseroit MC, Hatt M, Visvikis D. Potential Complementary Value of Noncontrast and Contrast Enhanced CT Radiomics in Colorectal Cancers. Acad Radiol. 2018
    1. Shin YR, Kim KA, Im S, et al. Prediction of KRAS Mutation in Rectal Cancer Using MRI. Anticancer Res. 2016;36(9):4799–804.
    1. Mao W, Zhou J, Zhang H, et al. Relationship between KRAS mutations and dual time point (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging in colorectal liver metastases. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2018.
    1. Pershad Y, Govindan S, Hara AK, et al. Using Naive Bayesian Analysis to Determine Imaging Characteristics of KRAS Mutations in Metastatic Colon Cancer. Diagnostics (Basel). 2017;7(3).
    1. Oner AO, Budak ES, Yildirim S, et al. The value of (18)FDG PET/CT parameters, hematological parameters and tumor markers in predicting KRAS oncogene mutation in colorectal cancer. Hell J Nucl Med. 2017;20(2):160–5.
    1. Kawada K, Toda K, Nakamoto Y, et al. Relationship Between 18F-FDG PET/CT Scans and KRAS Mutations in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(9):1322–7.
    1. Miles KA, Ganeshan B, Rodriguez-Justo M, et al. Multifunctional imaging signature for V-KI-RAS2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutations in colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(3):386–91.
    1. Krikelis D, Skoura E, Kotoula V, et al. Lack of association between KRAS mutations and 18F-FDG PET/CT in Caucasian metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(5):2571–9.
    1. Chen SW, Chiang HC, Chen WT, et al. Correlation between PET/CT parameters and KRAS expression in colorectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2014;39(8):685–9.
    1. Mariani P, Lae M, Degeorges A, et al. Concordant analysis of KRAS status in primary colon carcinoma and matched metastasis. Anticancer Res. 2010;30(10):4229–35.
    1. Santini D, Loupakis F, Vincenzi B, et al. High concordance of KRAS status between primary colorectal tumors and related metastatic sites: implications for clinical practice. Oncologist. 2008;13(12):1270–5.
    1. Lubner MG, Stabo N, Lubner SJ, et al. CT textural analysis of hepatic metastatic colorectal cancer: pre-treatment tumor heterogeneity correlates with pathology and clinical outcomes. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40(7):2331–7.
    1. Chen SW, Lin CY, Ho CM, et al. Genetic Alterations in Colorectal Cancer Have Different Patterns on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40(8):621–6.
    1. Lovinfosse P, Koopmansch B, Lambert F, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging in rectal cancer: relationship with the RAS mutational status. Br J Radiol. 2016;89(1063):20160212.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner