Delta影像组学对胰腺癌全程新辅助治疗病理学完全缓解的预测效能

Predictive efficacy of Delta radiomics for the pathological complete remission of pancrea-tic cancer after total neoadjuvant therapy

  • 摘要:
    目的 探讨Delta影像组学对胰腺癌全程新辅助治疗(TNT)病理学完全缓解(pCR)的预测效能。
    方法 采用回顾性队列研究方法。收集2019年1月至2024年9月河南省人民医院(郑州大学人民医院)收治的263例胰腺癌患者的临床病理资料;男166例,女97例;年龄为(56±12)岁。患者均行TNT。263例患者采用随机种子数按7∶3分为训练集184例和测试集79例。训练集用于构建预测模型,测试集用于验证预测模型效能。观察指标:(1)术后和随访情况。(2)影像学特征筛选与模型构建。(3)不同影像组学模型预测效能评价。正态分布的计量资料组间比较采用t检验;偏态分布的计量资料组间比较采用Mann‑Whitney U检验。计数资料组间比较采用χ²检验。采用Kaplan‑Meier法计算生存率并绘制生存曲线,Log‑rank检验进行生存分析。通过绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)、精确率‑召回率(P‑R)曲线及Bootstrap法评估模型预测患者TNT后pCR的效能,并计算曲线下面积(AUC)、准确率、召回率、F1分数。
    结果 (1)术后和随访情况。263例患者TNT后均行手术治疗,术后均行病理学检查,其中pCR 124例(训练集86例、测试集38例),非pCR 139例(训练集98例、测试集41例)。263例患者术后随访时间为6(3~12)个月,其中术后6个月内失访或因非肿瘤原因死亡15例(pCR 4例、非pCR 11例)。124例pCR患者和139例非pCR患者术后6个月无复发生存率分别为80%和50%,两组患者无复发生存情况比较,差异有统计学意义(χ²=22.84,P<0.05)。(2)影像学特征筛选与模型构建。传统影像学模型的构建:基于实体瘤疗效评价标准1.1,以相对退缩量(D%)为预测变量,构建Logistic回归模型。传统影像学模型的训练集AUC为0.7295%可信区间(CI)为0.63~0.81,测试集AUC为0.75(95%CI为0.66~0.84)。Delta影像组学模型构建:筛选10个非零系数特征。以筛选的特征作为输入变量,通过正则化Logistic回归、随机森林、梯度提升机和支持向量机算法构建Delta影像组学模型。(3)不同影像组学模型预测效能评价。Delta影像组学模型正则化Logistic回归算法在测试集中预测胰腺癌TNT后pCR的AUC为0.90,高于随机森林算法、梯度提升机算法、支持向量机算法(AUC分别为0.81、0.81、0.83),也高于传统影像学模型(AUC为0.72)。Bootstrap法结果显示:Delta影像组学模型正则化Logistic回归算法预测效能分别与Delta影像组学模型随机森林算法、Delta影像组学模型梯度提升机算法、Delta影像组学模型支持向量机算法、传统影像学模型比较,差异均有统计学意义(95%CI为0.03~0.16,0.03~0.16,0.03~0.13,0.08~0.29,P<0.05)。Delta影像组学模型正则化Logistic回归算法在上述模型中综合指标性能最优。
    结论 与传统影像学模型比较,Delta影像组学模型预测胰腺癌TNT后pCR的效能更优,其中Delta影像组学模型正则化Logistic回归算法综合指标性能最优。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To investigate the predictive efficacy of Delta radiomics for the patholo-gical complete remission (pCR) of pancreatic cancer after total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT).
    Methods The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 263 patients with pancreatic cancer who were admitted to Henan Provincial People′s Hospital (Zhengzhou University People's Hspital) from January 2019 to September 2024 were collected. There were 166 males and 97 females, aged (56±12)years. All patients underwent TNT. The 263 patients were randomly divided into a training set of 184 cases and a test set of 79 cases using a 7∶3 random seed count. The training set was used to construct the prediction model, and the test set was used to validate the performance of the prediction model. Observation indicators: (1) postoperative and follow‑up condi-tions; (2) imaging feature selection and model construction; (3) evaluation of predictive efficacy of different radiomic models. Comparison of measurement data with normal distribution between groups was conducted using the t test. Comparison of measurement data with skewed distribution between groups was conducted using theMann‑Whitney U test. Comparison of count data between groups was conducted using the chi‑square test. The Kaplan‑Meier method was used to calculate the survival rate and draw survival curve. The Log‑rank test was used for survival analysis. The perfor-mance of the prediction model for pCR after TNT was evaluated using the receiver operator charac-teristic (ROC) curve, precision‑recall (P‑R) curve and Bootstrap method, along with the calculation of area under the curve (AUC), precision rate, recall rate, F1-score.
    Results (1) Postoperative and follow‑up conditions. All 263 patients underwent surgery after TNT, with pathological examination revealing 124 cases of pCR (86 cases in the training set, 38 cases in the test set) and 139 cases of non‑pCR (98 cases in the training set, 41 cases in the test set), respectively. All 263 patients were followed up for 6(range, 3-12) months after surgery, of which 15 cases (4 cases of pCR and 11 cases of non-pCR) were lost to follow-up or died due to non-tumor reasons within 6 months after surgery. The postoperative 6-month recurrence-free survival rate of 124 pCR patients and 139 non-pCR patients were 80% and 50%, respectively, showing a significant difference between the two groups of patients (χ²=22.84, P<0.05). (2) Imaging feature selection and model construction. Construction of the traditional radiology model: based on the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors 1.1, the Logistic regression model was constructed using the relative shrinkage (D%) as a predictive variable. The AUC of traditional radiology model was 0.72 95% confidence interval (CI) as 0.63‒0.81 in the training set and 0.75 (95%CI as 0.66‒0.84) in the test set, respectively. Construction of the Delta radiomics model: 10 non‑zero coefficient features were selected. The Delta radiomics models were constructed by using the regularized Logistic regression, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and support vector machine algorithms through using selected features as input variables. (3) Evaluation of predictive efficacy of different radiomic models. The AUC of Delta radiomics model constructed by regularized Logistic regression algorithm in the test set for predicting pCR in pancreatic cancer after TNT was 0.90, higher than that of the random forest algorithm, gradient boosting machine algorithm, support vector machine algorithm (AUC as 0.81, 0.81, 0.83), and higher than that of the traditional radiology model (AUC as 0.72). Results of Bootstrap method revealed significant differences in the predictive efficacy of Delta radiomics model constructed by regularized Logistic regression algorithm compared to the Delta radiomics model constructed by random forest algorithm, gradient boosting machine algorithm, support vector machine algorithm and the tradi-tional radiology model (95%CI as 0.03‒0.16, 0.03‒0.16, 0.03‒0.13, 0.08‒0.29, P<0.05). The regularized Logistic regression algorithm within the Delta radiomics model demonstrated the best overall performance among the above models evaluated.
    Conclusion Compared to the traditional radiology model, the Delta radiomics model offers superior efficacy in predicting pCR of pancreatic cancer after TNT, in which the regularized Logistic regression algorithm demonstrates the best overall performance metrics.

     

/

返回文章
返回