Preoperative Prediction of Extramural Venous Invasion in Rectal Cancer: Comparison of the Diagnostic Efficacy of Radiomics Models and Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Xiangling Yu; Wenlong Song; Dajing Guo; Huan Liu; Haiping Zhang; Xiaojing He; Junjie Song; Jun Zhou; Xinjie Liu

doi:10.3389/fonc.2020.00459

Preoperative Prediction of Extramural Venous Invasion in Rectal Cancer: Comparison of the Diagnostic Efficacy of Radiomics Models and Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Front Oncol. 2020 Apr 9:10:459. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00459. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Xiangling Yu¹, Wenlong Song¹, Dajing Guo¹, Huan Liu², Haiping Zhang¹, Xiaojing He¹, Junjie Song¹, Jun Zhou¹, Xinjie Liu¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
² GE Healthcare, Shanghai, China.

Abstract

Background: To compare the diagnostic performance of radiomics models with that of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) perfusion parameters for the preoperative prediction of extramural venous invasion (EMVI) in rectal cancer patients and to develop a preoperative nomogram for predicting the EMVI status. Methods: In total, 106 rectal cancer patients were enrolled in our study. All patients under went preoperative rectal high-resolution MRI and DCE-MRI. We built five models based on the perfusion parameters of DCE-MRI (quantitative model), the radiomics of T₂-weighted (T₂W) CUBE imaging (R₁ model), DCE-MRI (R₂ model), clinical features (clinical model), and clinical-radiomics features. The predictive efficacy of the radiomics signature was assessed and internally verified. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was used to compare the diagnostic performance of different radiomics models and DCE-MRI quantitative parameters. The radiomics score and clinical-pathologic risk factors were incorporated into an easy-to-use nomogram. Results: The quantitative parameters K ^trans and Ve were significantly higher in the EMVI-positive group than in the EMVI-negative group (both P =0.02). K ^trans combined with Ve showed a fair degree of accuracy (AUC 0.680 in the training cohort and AUC 0.715 in the validation cohort) compared with K ^trans or Ve alone. The AUCs of the R₁ and R₂ models were 0.826, 0.715 and 0.872, 0.812 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. In addition, the R₂-C model yielded an AUC of 0.904 in the training cohort and 0.812 in the validation cohort. The nomogram was presented based on the clinical-radiomics model. The calibration curves showed good agreement. Conclusion: The radiomics nomogram that incorporates the radiomics score, histopathological grade and T stage demonstrated better diagnostic accuracy than the DCE-MRI quantitative parameters and may have significant clinical implications for the preoperative individualized prediction of EMVI in rectal cancer patients.

Keywords: dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; extramural venous invasion; prediction; quantitative parameters; radiomics; rectal cancer.