Abstract

PurposeTo evaluate isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) status in clinically diagnosed grade II~IV glioma patients using the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification based on MRI parameters.Materials and MethodsOne hundred and seventy-six patients with confirmed WHO grade II~IV glioma were retrospectively investigated as the study set, including lower-grade glioma (WHO grade II, n = 64; WHO grade III, n = 38) and glioblastoma (WHO grade IV, n = 74). The minimum apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmin) in the tumor and the contralateral normal-appearing white matter (ADCn) and the rADC (ADCmin to ADCn ratio) were defined and calculated. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis was carried out to evaluate interobserver and intraobserver agreement for the ADC measurements. Interobserver agreement for the morphologic categories was evaluated by Cohen’s kappa analysis. The nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine whether the ADC measurements and glioma subtypes were related. By univariable analysis, if the differences in a variable were significant (P<0.05) or an image feature had high consistency (ICC >0.8; κ >0.6), then it was chosen as a predictor variable. The performance of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was evaluated using several machine learning models, including logistic regression, support vector machine, Naive Bayes and Ensemble. Five evaluation indicators were adopted to compare the models. The optimal model was developed as the final model to predict IDH status in 40 patients with glioma as the subsequent test set. DeLong analysis was used to compare significant differences in the AUCs.ResultsIn the study set, six measured variables (rADC, age, enhancement, calcification, hemorrhage, and cystic change) were selected for the machine learning model. Logistic regression had better performance than other models. Two predictive models, model 1 (including all predictor variables) and model 2 (excluding calcification), correctly classified IDH status with an AUC of 0.897 and 0.890, respectively. The test set performed equally well in prediction, indicating the effectiveness of the trained classifier. The subgroup analysis revealed that the model predicted IDH status of LGG and GBM with accuracy of 84.3% (AUC = 0.873) and 85.1% (AUC = 0.862) in the study set, and with the accuracy of 70.0% (AUC = 0.762) and 70.0% (AUC = 0.833) in the test set, respectively.ConclusionThrough the use of machine-learning algorithms, the accurate prediction of IDH-mutant versus IDH-wildtype was achieved for adult diffuse gliomas via noninvasive MR imaging characteristics, including ADC values and tumor morphologic features, which are considered widely available in most clinical workstations.

Highlights

  • Cerebral diffuse infiltrating gliomas are the second most common type of primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor, second only to meningiomas

  • Previous studies have analyzed the association between MRI features and the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) status of lower-grade gliomas

  • II-III) and glioblastomas (WHO grade IV) [Thust et al and Xing et al evaluated the features of grade II/III gliomas [8, 12], while Zhang et al identified MRI features associated with grade III and IV gliomas [7]]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cerebral diffuse infiltrating gliomas are the second most common type of primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor, second only to meningiomas. According to the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of CNS tumors, adult diffuse gliomas include astrocytic tumors, oligodendrogliomas, and glioblastomas (WHO grade II~IV) [1]. These tumors account for approximately 22% of all CNS tumors. In the United States, more than 16,000 cases of adult diffuse glioma are reported each year, with an incidence of approximately 5.13 per 100,000 people. Due to the heterogeneity of these neuroepithelial tumors, they have different clinical characteristics, biological behaviors, and histopathological characteristics, and substantial differences in treatment and prognosis

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call