» Articles » PMID: 23294985

Multi-kernel Graph Embedding for Detection, Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer Via MRI/MRS

Overview
Journal Med Image Anal
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Radiology
Date 2013 Jan 9
PMID 23294985
Citations 41
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Even though 1 in 6 men in the US, in their lifetime are expected to be diagnosed with prostate cancer (CaP), only 1 in 37 is expected to die on account of it. Consequently, among many men diagnosed with CaP, there has been a recent trend to resort to active surveillance (wait and watch) if diagnosed with a lower Gleason score on biopsy, as opposed to seeking immediate treatment. Some researchers have recently identified imaging markers for low and high grade CaP on multi-parametric (MP) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (such as T2 weighted MR imaging (T2w MRI) and MR spectroscopy (MRS)). In this paper, we present a novel computerized decision support system (DSS), called Semi Supervised Multi Kernel Graph Embedding (SeSMiK-GE), that quantitatively combines structural, and metabolic imaging data for distinguishing (a) benign versus cancerous, and (b) high- versus low-Gleason grade CaP regions from in vivo MP-MRI. A total of 29 1.5Tesla endorectal pre-operative in vivo MP MRI (T2w MRI, MRS) studies from patients undergoing radical prostatectomy were considered in this study. Ground truth for evaluation of the SeSMiK-GE classifier was obtained via annotation of disease extent on the pre-operative imaging by visually correlating the MRI to the ex vivo whole mount histologic specimens. The SeSMiK-GE framework comprises of three main modules: (1) multi-kernel learning, (2) semi-supervised learning, and (3) dimensionality reduction, which are leveraged for the construction of an integrated low dimensional representation of the different imaging and non-imaging MRI protocols. Hierarchical classifiers for diagnosis and Gleason grading of CaP are then constructed within this unified low dimensional representation. Step 1 of the hierarchical classifier employs a random forest classifier in conjunction with the SeSMiK-GE based data representation and a probabilistic pairwise Markov Random Field algorithm (which allows for imposition of local spatial constraints) to yield a voxel based classification of CaP presence. The CaP region of interest identified in Step 1 is then subsequently classified as either high or low Gleason grade CaP in Step 2. Comparing SeSMiK-GE with unimodal T2w MRI, MRS classifiers and a commonly used feature concatenation (COD) strategy, yielded areas (AUC) under the receiver operative curve (ROC) of (a) 0.89±0.09 (SeSMiK), 0.54±0.18 (T2w MRI), 0.61±0.20 (MRS), and 0.64±0.23 (COD) for distinguishing benign from CaP regions, and (b) 0.84±0.07 (SeSMiK),0.54±0.13 (MRI), 0.59±0.19 (MRS), and 0.62±0.18 (COD) for distinguishing high and low grade CaP using a leave one out cross-validation strategy, all evaluations being performed on a per voxel basis. Our results suggest that following further rigorous validation, SeSMiK-GE could be developed into a powerful diagnostic and prognostic tool for detection and grading of CaP in vivo and in helping to determine the appropriate treatment option. Identifying low grade disease in vivo might allow CaP patients to opt for active surveillance rather than immediately opt for aggressive therapy such as radical prostatectomy.

Citing Articles

An Update on MR Spectroscopy in Cancer Management: Advances in Instrumentation, Acquisition, and Analysis.

Martinez Luque E, Liu Z, Sung D, Goldberg R, Agarwal R, Bhattacharya A Radiol Imaging Cancer. 2024; 6(3):e230101.

PMID: 38578207 PMC: 11148681. DOI: 10.1148/rycan.230101.


The role of radiomics in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Delgadillo R, Ford J, Abramowitz M, Dal Pra A, Pollack A, Stoyanova R Strahlenther Onkol. 2020; 196(10):900-912.

PMID: 32821953 PMC: 7545508. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-020-01679-9.


Detection of Dominant Intra-prostatic Lesions in Patients With Prostate Cancer Using an Artificial Neural Network and MR Multi-modal Radiomics Analysis.

Bagher-Ebadian H, Janic B, Liu C, Pantelic M, Hearshen D, Elshaikh M Front Oncol. 2019; 9:1313.

PMID: 31850209 PMC: 6901911. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.01313.


Repeatability of radiomics and machine learning for DWI: Short-term repeatability study of 112 patients with prostate cancer.

Merisaari H, Taimen P, Shiradkar R, Ettala O, Pesola M, Saunavaara J Magn Reson Med. 2019; 83(6):2293-2309.

PMID: 31703155 PMC: 7047644. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28058.


Semi-automatic classification of prostate cancer on multi-parametric MR imaging using a multi-channel 3D convolutional neural network.

Aldoj N, Lukas S, Dewey M, Penzkofer T Eur Radiol. 2019; 30(2):1243-1253.

PMID: 31468158 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06417-z.


References
1.
Tiwari P, Kurhanewicz J, Rosen M, Madabhushi A . Semi supervised multi kernel (SeSMiK) graph embedding: identifying aggressive prostate cancer via magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv. 2010; 13(Pt 3):666-73. PMC: 4335645. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-15711-0_83. View

2.
Kelm B, Menze B, Zechmann C, Baudendistel K, Hamprecht F . Automated estimation of tumor probability in prostate magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging: pattern recognition vs quantification. Magn Reson Med. 2006; 57(1):150-9. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21112. View

3.
Wang L, Mazaheri Y, Zhang J, Ishill N, Kuroiwa K, Hricak H . Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy. Radiology. 2007; 246(1):168-76. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2461070057. View

4.
Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D, Hricak H, Narayan P, Carroll P, Nelson S . Three-dimensional H-1 MR spectroscopic imaging of the in situ human prostate with high (0.24-0.7-cm3) spatial resolution. Radiology. 1996; 198(3):795-805. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.198.3.8628874. View

5.
Langer D, van der Kwast T, Evans A, Plotkin A, Trachtenberg J, Wilson B . Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features. Radiology. 2010; 255(2):485-94. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10091343. View