Impact of MRI radiomic feature normalization for prognostic modelling in uterine endometrial and cervical cancers

Erlend Hodneland,Erling Andersen,Kari S Wagner-Larsen,Julie A Dybvik,Njål Lura,Kristine E Fasmer,Mari K Halle,Camilla Krakstad,Ingfrid Haldorsen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66659-w
2024-07-22
Abstract:Widespread clinical use of MRI radiomic tumor profiling for prognostication and treatment planning in cancers faces major obstacles due to limitations in standardization of radiomic features. The purpose of the current work was to assess the impact of different MRI scanning- and normalization protocols for the statistical analyses of tumor radiomic data in two patient cohorts with uterine endometrial-(EC) (n = 136) and cervical (CC) (n = 132) cancer. 1.5 T and 3 T, T1-weighted MRI 2 min post-contrast injection, T2-weighted turbo spin echo imaging, and diffusion-weighted imaging were acquired. Radiomic features were extracted from within manually segmented tumors in 3D and normalized either using z-score normalization or a linear regression model (LRM) accounting for linear dependencies with MRI acquisition parameters. Patients were clustered into two groups based on radiomic profile. Impact of MRI scanning parameters on cluster composition and prognostication were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis tests, Kaplan-Meier plots, log-rank test, random survival forests and LASSO Cox regression with time-dependent area under curve (tdAUC) (α = 0.05). A large proportion of the radiomic features was statistically associated with MRI scanning protocol in both cohorts (EC: 162/385 [42%]; CC: 180/292 [62%]). A substantial number of EC (49/136 [36%]) and CC (50/132 [38%]) patients changed cluster when clustering was performed after z-score-versus LRM normalization. Prognostic modeling based on cluster groups yielded similar outputs for the two normalization methods in the EC/CC cohorts (log-rank test; z-score: p = 0.02/0.33; LRM: p = 0.01/0.45). Mean tdAUC for prognostic modeling of disease-specific survival (DSS) by the radiomic features in EC/CC was similar for the two normalization methods (random survival forests; z-score: mean tdAUC = 0.77/0.78; LRM: mean tdAUC = 0.80/0.75; LASSO Cox; z-score: mean tdAUC = 0.64/0.76; LRM: mean tdAUC = 0.76/0.75). Severe biases in tumor radiomics data due to MRI scanning parameters exist. Z-score normalization does not eliminate these biases, whereas LRM normalization effectively does. Still, radiomic cluster groups after z-score- and LRM normalization were similarly associated with DSS in EC and CC patients.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?