» Articles » PMID: 31573400

Reproducibility of CT Radiomic Features Within the Same Patient: Influence of Radiation Dose and CT Reconstruction Settings

Overview
Journal Radiology
Specialty Radiology
Date 2019 Oct 2
PMID 31573400
Citations 112
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background Results of recent phantom studies show that variation in CT acquisition parameters and reconstruction techniques may make radiomic features largely nonreproduceable and of limited use for prognostic clinical studies. Purpose To investigate the effect of CT radiation dose and reconstruction settings on the reproducibility of radiomic features, as well as to identify correction factors for mitigating these sources of variability. Materials and Methods This was a secondary analysis of a prospective study of metastatic liver lesions in patients who underwent staging with single-energy dual-source contrast material-enhanced staging CT between September 2011 and April 2012. Technique parameters were altered, resulting in 28 CT data sets per patient that included different dose levels, section thicknesses, kernels, and reconstruction algorithm settings. By using a training data set ( = 76), reproducible intensity, shape, and texture radiomic features (reproducibility threshold, ≥ 0.95) were selected and correction factors were calculated by using a linear model to convert each radiomic feature to its estimated value in a reference technique. By using a test data set ( = 75), the reproducibility of hierarchical clustering based on 106 radiomic features measured with different CT techniques was assessed. Results Data in 78 patients (mean age, 60 years ± 10; 33 women) with 151 liver lesions were included. The percentage of radiomic features deemed reproducible for any variation of the different technical parameters was 11% (12 of 106). Of all technical parameters, reconstructed section thickness had the largest impact on the reproducibility of radiomic features (12.3% [13 of 106]) if only one technical parameter was changed while all other technical parameters were kept constant. The results of the hierarchical cluster analysis showed improved clustering reproducibility when reproducible radiomic features with dedicated correction factors were used (ρ = 0.39-0.71 vs ρ = 0.14-0.47). Conclusion Most radiomic features are highly affected by CT acquisition and reconstruction settings, to the point of being nonreproducible. Selecting reproducible radiomic features along with study-specific correction factors offers improved clustering reproducibility. © RSNA, 2019 See also the editorial by Sosna in this issue.

Citing Articles

Robustness of radiomics within photon-counting detector CT: impact of acquisition and reconstruction factors.

Zhang H, Lu T, Wang L, Xing Y, Hu Y, Xu Z Eur Radiol. 2025; .

PMID: 39890616 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-025-11374-x.


The potential of photon-counting CT for the improved precision of lung nodule radiomics.

McCabe C, Abadi E, Zarei M, Segars P, Segars W, Samei E Phys Med Biol. 2025; 70(3).

PMID: 39813810 PMC: 11866323. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/adaad2.


Enhancing Radiomics Reproducibility: Deep Learning-Based Harmonization of Abdominal Computed Tomography (CT) Images.

Lee S, Hong Y, Cho Y, Jeong D, Lee J, Choi J Bioengineering (Basel). 2025; 11(12.

PMID: 39768030 PMC: 11673047. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11121212.


Interrelation of pericoronary adipose tissue texture and coronary artery disease of the left coronary artery in cardiac photon-counting computed tomography.

Kahmann J, Norenberg D, Papavassiliu T, Schoenberg S, Froelich M, Ayx I Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11:1499219.

PMID: 39703885 PMC: 11656310. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1499219.


Radiomic features of PET/CT imaging of large B cell lymphoma lesions predicts CAR T cell therapy efficacy.

Balagurunathan Y, Wei Z, Qi J, Thompson Z, Dean E, Lu H Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1485039.

PMID: 39659779 PMC: 11629080. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1485039.


References
1.
Midya A, Chakraborty J, Gonen M, Do R, Simpson A . Influence of CT acquisition and reconstruction parameters on radiomic feature reproducibility. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2018; 5(1):011020. PMC: 5812985. DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011020. View

2.
Berenguer R, Pastor-Juan M, Canales-Vazquez J, Castro-Garcia M, Villas M, Mansilla Legorburo F . Radiomics of CT Features May Be Nonreproducible and Redundant: Influence of CT Acquisition Parameters. Radiology. 2018; 288(2):407-415. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018172361. View

3.
Gillies R, Kinahan P, Hricak H . Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data. Radiology. 2015; 278(2):563-77. PMC: 4734157. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015151169. View

4.
Lu L, Ehmke R, Schwartz L, Zhao B . Assessing Agreement between Radiomic Features Computed for Multiple CT Imaging Settings. PLoS One. 2016; 11(12):e0166550. PMC: 5199063. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166550. View

5.
OConnor J, Aboagye E, Adams J, Aerts H, Barrington S, Beer A . Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016; 14(3):169-186. PMC: 5378302. DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.162. View