Yi Duan1, Yida Wang1, Naying He2, Yan Li2, Zenghui Cheng2, Yu Liu2, Zhijia Jin2, Pei Huang3, Shengdi Chen3, Ewart Mark Haacke2,4, Fuhua Yan2, and Guang Yang1
1East China Normal University, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance, Shanghai, China, 2Department of Radiology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China, 3Department of Neurology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China, 4Department of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, United States
Synopsis
Diagnosing
Parkinson’s disease (PD) is still a clinical challenge. Deep grey matter is
involved in the pathophysiological changes of PD. We built a radiomics model to
distinguish PD from normal controls (NC) based on five brain nuclei in multiple
quantitative images derived from STrategically Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE)
imaging. This model combined features from the caudate nucleus, globus
pallidus, putamen, red nucleus, and substantia nigra regions in QSM, T1and proton
density maps and achieved
a test AUC of 0.948. Features from the SN region as seen in the QSM images were
found to be the most important ones for classification.
INTRODUCTION
Diagnosing
Parkinson’s disease (PD) is still a clinical challenge1. Deep grey
matters are involved in the pathophysiological changes of PD. STrategically
Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE) could provide multi-contrast quantitative images
within 5 minutes scanning 2, 3. We aimed to utilize multi brain
nuclei from quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM), T1 mapping and proton density
mapping, which were all derived from STAGE, to build radiomic models and
develop an automated classification framework for PD patients diagnosis.METHODS
A
total of 99 PD patients and 287 normal controls were collected at Ruijin
Hospital. All data were collected on a 3T Ingenia scanner (Philips Healthcare,
Netherlands) using a 15-channel head coil. The parameters used for STAGE
scanning are given in Table 1. The axial slice orientation was set to be
parallel to the anterior commissure posterior commissure (ACPC) line for all of
sequences. Three modalities including QSM, T1 mapping and proton density mapping were processed from STAGE data afterwards.
The dataset was
randomly split into a training set (69PD/201NC) to select features from each
modality and build the model and a testing set (30PD/87NC) to evaluate the
performance of the model. All cases were input into a trained U-net++ model to segment
caudate
nucleus (CN), globus pallidus (GP), putamen (PUT), red nucleus (RN), and
substantia nigra (SN) regions as shown in Fig.1. The
resulting five regions of interest (ROI) were used in the radiomics models to
classify PD and NC for each ROI on each MR modality. For each ROI, the selected
features from three the quantitative STAGE imaging maps were concatenated to
build a combined brain model. We concatenated retained features
in the five brain nuclei models again to build the final classification model.
The flowchart of the radiomics experiments is shown in Fig. 2.
For each ROI and MR
modality, 1116 radiomics features including first order and texture features
were extracted in the original image, wavelet, and the LoG filtered image with
Pyradiomics. The training dataset was balanced with upsampling after feature
normalization. Then, Pearson Correlation Coefficient
(PCC) and recursive feature elimination (RFE) algorithms were used to reduce
the feature dimension and select features with 5-fold cross validation in the
training dataset. Finally, a support vector machine (SVM) or logistic
regression (LR) classifier were built using the selected features. All the
above processes were implemented with FeAture Explorer4.RESULTS
The
segmentation model achieved a mean Dice value (DSC) of 0.806 ± 0.051, 0.864 ±
0.042, 0.856 ± 0.037, 0.855 ± 0.037, and 0.832 ± 0.054 for CN, GP, PUT, RN, and
SN regions. In the same testing dataset, the area under the receiver
operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of the radiomics model for each ROI
and quantitative MR measure is shown in Table 2. We used the ROC
curve to evaluate the performance of the final model (Fig. 3) and the model
yielded an AUC of 0.948 (95% CI, 0.886–0.989; p < 0.001), an accuracy of
91.0%, a sensitivity of 86.7%, a specificity of 92.6%, a positive
predictive value (PPV) of 81.3%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 94.9%
in the testing dataset. The final model used 28 features selected with 1-
standard error rule (Fig. 3) and the 6 most important features were shown in
Table 3, together with their corresponding coefficients.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
In summary, we have introduced a radiomics approach
based on STAGE-derived quantitative images to differentiate PD from NC. This model
utilized the 5 deep nuclei (CP, GPI, PUT, SN and RN) as seen in the QSM, T1 maps
and proton density maps to distinguish PD from NC and achieved a high accuracy.
The features extracted from the SN region on the QSM images played an important
role in classifying PD and NC. From Table 3, we can see features
from the PUT and CN in T1 mapping images also made significant
contributions to the classification. The proposed radiomics approach
could effectively and accurately discriminate PD patients from NC and has the potential to support a clinical radiological
diagnosis.Acknowledgements
NoneReferences
1. Leentjens
A F G. Depression in Parkinson’s disease: conceptual issues and clinical
challenges. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 2004, 17(3):
120-126.
2. Chen
Y, Liu S, Wang Y, et al. STrategically Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE) imaging,
part I: Creating enhanced T1 contrast and standardized susceptibility weighted
imaging and quantitative susceptibility mapping. Magnetic resonance imaging,
2018, 46: 130-139.
3. Wang
Y , Chen Y , Wu D , et al. STrategically Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE)
imaging, part II: Correcting for RF inhomogeneities in estimating T1 and proton
density. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2018:46:140-150.
4. Song
Y, Zhang J, Zhang Y, et al. FeAture Explorer (FAE): A tool for developing and
comparing radiomics models. Plos one, 2020, 15(8): e0237587.