Search

Our aim is to predict possible gross total and subtotal resections of skull meningiomas from pre-treatment T1 post contrast MR-images using radiomics and machine learning in a representative patient cohort. We analyse the accuracy of our model predictions depending on the tumor location within the skull and the postoperative tumor volume. In this retrospective, IRB-approved study, image segmentation of the contrast enhancing parts of the tumor was semi-automatically performed using the 3D Slicer open-source software platform. Imaging data were split into training data and independent test data at random. We extracted a total of 107 radiomic features by hand-delineated regions of interest on T1 post contrast MR images. Feature preselection and model construction were performed with eight different machine learning algorithms. Each model was estimated 100 times on new training data and then tested on a previously unknown, independent test data set to avoid possible overfitting. Our cohort included 138 patients. A gross total resection of the meningioma was performed in 107 cases and a subtotal resection in the remaining 31 cases. Using the training data, the mean area under the curve (AUC), mean accuracy, mean kappa, mean sensitivity and mean specificity were 0.901, 0.875, 0.629, 0.675 and 0.933 respectively. We obtained very similar results with the independent test data: mean AUC = 0.900, mean accuracy = 0.881, mean kappa = 0.644, mean sensitivity = 0.692 and mean specificity = 0.936. Thus, our model exposes good and stable predictive performance with both training and test data. Our radiomics approach shows that with machine learning algorithms and comparatively few explanatory factors such as the location of the tumor within the skull as well as its shape, it is possible to make accurate predictions about whether a meningioma can be completely resected by surgery. Complete resections and resections with larger postoperative tumor volumes can be predicted with very high accuracy. However, cases with very small postoperative tumor volumes are comparatively difficult to predict correctly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate the applicability and performance of automated machine learning (AutoML) for potential applications in diagnostic neuroradiology. In the medical sector, there is a rapidly growing demand for machine learning methods, but only a limited number of corresponding experts. The comparatively simple handling of AutoML should enable even non-experts to develop adequate machine learning models with manageable effort. We aim to investigate the feasibility as well as the advantages and disadvantages of developing AutoML models compared to developing conventional machine learning models. We discuss the results in relation to a concrete example of a medical prediction application. In this retrospective IRB-approved study, a cohort of 107 patients who underwent gross total meningioma resection and a second cohort of 31 patients who underwent subtotal resection were included. Image segmentation of the contrast enhancing parts of the tumor was performed semi-automatically using the open-source software platform 3D Slicer. A total of 107 radiomic features were extracted by hand-delineated regions of interest from the pre-treatment MRI images of each patient. Within the AutoML approach, 20 different machine learning algorithms were trained and tested simultaneously. For comparison, a neural network and different conventional machine learning algorithms were trained and tested. With respect to the exemplary medical prediction application used in this study to evaluate the performance of Auto ML, namely the pre-treatment prediction of the achievable resection status of meningioma, AutoML achieved remarkable performance nearly equivalent to that of a feed-forward neural network with a single hidden layer. However, in the clinical case study considered here, logistic regression outperformed the AutoML algorithm. Using independent test data, we observed the following classification results (AutoML/neural network/logistic regression): mean area under the curve = 0.849/0.879/0.900, mean accuracy = 0.821/0.839/0.881, mean kappa = 0.465/0.491/0.644, mean sensitivity = 0.578/0.577/0.692 and mean specificity = 0.891/0.914/0.936. The results obtained with AutoML are therefore very promising. However, the AutoML models in our study did not yet show the corresponding performance of the best models obtained with conventional machine learning methods. While AutoML may facilitate and simplify the task of training and testing machine learning algorithms as applied in the field of neuroradiology and medical imaging, a considerable amount of expert knowledge may still be needed to develop models with the highest possible discriminatory power for diagnostic neuroradiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]