↓ Skip to main content

The effects of segmentation algorithms on the measurement of 18F-FDG PET texture parameters in non-small cell lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in EJNMMI Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
The effects of segmentation algorithms on the measurement of 18F-FDG PET texture parameters in non-small cell lung cancer
Published in
EJNMMI Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13550-017-0310-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Usman Bashir, Gurdip Azad, Muhammad Musib Siddique, Saana Dhillon, Nikheel Patel, Paul Bassett, David Landau, Vicky Goh, Gary Cook

Abstract

Measures of tumour heterogeneity derived from 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) scans are increasingly reported as potential biomarkers of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for classification and prognostication. Several segmentation algorithms have been used to delineate tumours, but their effects on the reproducibility and predictive and prognostic capability of derived parameters have not been evaluated. The purpose of our study was to retrospectively compare various segmentation algorithms in terms of inter-observer reproducibility and prognostic capability of texture parameters derived from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (18)F-FDG PET/CT images. Fifty three NSCLC patients (mean age 65.8 years; 31 males) underwent pre-chemoradiotherapy (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans. Three readers segmented tumours using freehand (FH), 40% of maximum intensity threshold (40P), and fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian (FLAB) algorithms. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to measure the inter-observer variability of the texture features derived by the three segmentation algorithms. Univariate cox regression was used on 12 commonly reported texture features to predict overall survival (OS) for each segmentation algorithm. Model quality was compared across segmentation algorithms using Akaike information criterion (AIC). 40P was the most reproducible algorithm (median ICC 0.9; interquartile range [IQR] 0.85-0.92) compared with FLAB (median ICC 0.83; IQR 0.77-0.86) and FH (median ICC 0.77; IQR 0.7-0.85). On univariate cox regression analysis, 40P found 2 out of 12 variables, i.e. first-order entropy and grey-level co-occurence matrix (GLCM) entropy, to be significantly associated with OS; FH and FLAB found 1, i.e., first-order entropy. For each tested variable, survival models for all three segmentation algorithms were of similar quality, exhibiting comparable AIC values with overlapping 95% CIs. Compared with both FLAB and FH, segmentation with 40P yields superior inter-observer reproducibility of texture features. Survival models generated by all three segmentation algorithms are of at least equivalent utility. Our findings suggest that a segmentation algorithm using a 40% of maximum threshold is acceptable for texture analysis of (18)F-FDG PET in NSCLC.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 21 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Computer Science 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 24 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,440,241
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Research
#393
of 564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,792
of 317,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Research
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 564 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.