nach oben

Erschienen in:

Open Access 01.12.2024 | Research

Combining radiomics with thyroid imaging reporting and data system to predict lateral cervical lymph node metastases in medullary thyroid cancer

verfasst von: Zhiqiang Liu, Xiwei Zhang, Xiaohui Zhao, Qianqian Guo, Zhengjiang Li, Minghui Wei, Lijuan Niu, Changming An

Erschienen in: BMC Medical Imaging | Ausgabe 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) is a rare type of thyroid cancer. Accurate prediction of lateral cervical lymph node metastases (LCLNM) in MTC patients can help guide surgical decisions and ensure that patients receive the most appropriate and effective surgery. To our knowledge, no studies have been published that use radiomics analysis to forecast LCLNM in MTC patients. The purpose of this study is to develop a radiomics combined with thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS) model that can use preoperative thyroid ultrasound images to noninvasively predict the LCLNM status of MTC.

Methods

We retrospectively included 218 MTC patients who were confirmed from postoperative pathology as LCLNM negative (n=111) and positive (n=107). Ultrasound features were selected using the Student’s t-test, while radiomics features are first extracted from preoperative thyroid ultrasound images, and then a two-step feature selection approach was used to select features. These features are then used to establish three regularized logistic regression models, namely the TI-RADS model (TM), the radiomics model (RM), and the radiomics-TI-RADS model (RTM), in 5-fold cross-validation to determine the likelihood of the LCLNM. The Delong’s test and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate and compare the performance of the models.

Results

The ultrasound features of margin and TI-RADS level, and a total of 12 selected radiomics features, were significantly different between the LCLNM negative and positive groups (p<0.05). The TM, RM, and RTM yielded an averaged AUC of 0.68±0.05, 0.78±0.06, and 0.82±0.05 in the 5-fold cross-validation dataset, respectively. RM and RTM are statistically better than TM (p<0.05 and p<0.001) according to Delong test. DCA demonstrates that RTM brings more benefit than TM and RM.

Conclusions

We have developed a joint radiomics-based model for noninvasive prediction of the LCLNM in MTC patients solely using preoperative thyroid ultrasound imaging. It has the potential to be used as a complementary tool to help guide treatment decisions for this rare form of thyroid cancer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-024-01222-7.

Zhiqiang Liu, Xiwei Zhang and Xiaohui Zhao contributed equally to this paper.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

TI-RADS

Thyroid imaging reporting and data system

MTC

Medullary thyroid carcinoma

LCLNM

Lateral cervical lymph node metastases

ATA

American Thyroid Association

ACR

American College of Radiology

ROI

Region of interest

LASSO

Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator

PyRadiomics

Python package for the extraction of radiomics features from medical imaging

GLCM

Gray level cooccurence matrix

GLRLM

Gray level run length matrix

GLSZM

Gray level size zone matrix

NGTDM

Neighbouring gray tone difference matrix

GLDM

Gray level dependence matrix

TI-RADS model

Radiomics model

RTM

Radiomics combined with TI-RADS model

ROC

Receiver operating characteristic

AUC

Area under the ROC curve

ACC

Accuracy

SEN

Sensitivity

SPE

Specificity

PPV

Positive predictive value

NPV

Negative predictive value

MCC

Matthew's correlation coefficient

DCA

Decision curve analysis

Background

Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) is a rare type of thyroid cancer [1], accounting for 1%-2% of all thyroid cancers [2]. It has a higher propensity for lateral cervical lymph node metastases, accounting for 70% [3] of cases, as compared to other types of thyroid cancer. The American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines recommend surgery as the first-line therapy for definitive cure in MTC patients [4]. The standard surgical therapy for MTC typically includes total thyroidectomy and lymphadenectomy. However, the extent of cervical lymph node dissection is still a matter of debate, particularly regarding lateral cervical lymph node dissection [5‐7]. The surgery decision making can affect the prognosis of MTC patients. Therefore, it is particularly important for preoperative assessment for lateral cervical lymph node metastases (LCLNM) in such patients.

Thyroid ultrasound is the first choice and a useful tool for diagnosing thyroid disease [6]. The Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) has been used as a standard method for the classification of thyroid nodules [8]. Due to its ease of use and clinical viability, TI-RADS has drawn considerable attention. The applicability of ultrasound-based TI-RADS in MTC patients has been evaluated and the relationship between ultrasound features and lymph node metastases has been assessed [9]. However, TI-RADS results are usually affected by the experience of reviewers in most cases, and information from ultrasound imaging has not been fully explored, at present only relying on the naked eye.

Radiomics can extract quantitative features from medical images that may reflect information about underlying pathophysiology that is not visible to the human eye [10]. In recent years, there have been numerous studies that highlight the emerging field of utilizing medical images with radiomics, combined with machine learning and deep learning to enhance the understanding and treatment of thyroid cancers, by providing personalized and detailed insights into tumor development [11‐13]. Biomarkers based on quantitative radiomics and deep learning features from preoperative thyroid ultrasound have demonstrated promising outcomes for predicting distant metastases in follicular thyroid carcinoma [14], predicting thyroid malignancy [15‐17], and predicting lymph nodes status of patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma [18‐22].

Accurate prediction of LCLNM status in MTC patients can help guide surgical decisions and ensure that patients receive the most appropriate and effective surgery. To our knowledge, no studies have been published that use radiomics analysis to forecast LCLNM in MTC patients. The purpose of this study is to develop a separate biomarker which is radiomics-based for noninvasively predicting the LCLNM status of MTC using preoperative thyroid ultrasound images.

Methods

Patient selection and data acquisition

We retrospectively collected the patients with pathologically confirmed MTC between January 2010 and February 2022 at our medical center. Patients were included in this study if they: (1) received preoperative thyroid ultrasound with satisfactory image quality; (2) underwent initial surgical therapy in our medical center; (3) had complete medical records. A total of 218 eligible MTC patients were consecutively included and reviewed as shown in Fig. 1.

The age at diagnosis and sex, as well as the ultrasound features from American College of Radiology (ACR) TI-RADS and surgical pathology report were retrieved from electronic medical records. Table 1 shows an overview of patient characteristics. The LCLNM status (negative, N0/N1a or positive, N1b) were confirmed by surgical pathology.

Table 1

Patient characteristics of the 218 patients in medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) with lateral cervical lymph node metastases (LCLNM) negative (N0/N1a) and positive (N1b)

Characteristics	LCLNM negative (n=111)	LCLNM positive (n=107)	p-Value
Age (years)^a	49 (13~78)	50 (21~75)	0.995
Sex^b			<0.001
Male	39 (35.1)	63 (58.9)
Female	72 (64.9)	44 (41.1)
ACR TI-RADS
Composition^b			0.222
Cystic or Spongiform	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
Mixed cystic and nodule	11 (9.9)	5 (4.7)
Solid	100 (90.1)	102 (95.3)
Echogenicity^b			0.491
Anechoic	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
Hyperechoic or isoechoic	3 (2.7)	2 (1.9)
Hypoechoic	89 (80.2)	80 (74.8)
Very hypoechoic	19 (17.1)	25 (23.4)
Shape^b			0.392
Wider-than-tall	105 (94.6)	97 (90.7)
Taller-than-wide	6 (5.4)	10 (9.3)
Margin^b			<0.001
Smooth or Ill-defined	22 (19.8)	7 (6.5)
Lobulated or Irregular	87 (78.4)	69 (64.5)
Extra-thyroidal extension	2 (1.8)	31 (29.0)
Echogenic Foci^b			0.393
None or Large comet-tail artifacts	49 (44.1)	38 (35.5)
Macrocalcifications	41 (36.9)	48 (44.9)
Peripheral(rim) calcifications	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
Punctate echogenic foci	21 (18.9)	21 (19.6)
TI-RADS Level^b			0.016
TR1	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
TR2	1 (0.9)	0 (0.0)
TR3	5 (4.6)	0 (0.0)
TR4	35 (31.5)	22 (20.6)
TR5	70 (63.1)	85 (79.4)

^aData are presented as medians with ranges in parentheses

^bData in parentheses are percentages

Ultrasound images acquisition and preprocessing

One of four ultrasound scanners (GE logic 9-General Electric Company, USA; GE logic E9-General Electric Company, USA; Philips IU 22-Royal Dutch Philips Electronics Ltd, the Netherlands; and Siemens Acuson S2000-Siemens AG FWB:SIE, Germany) with a 5 to 12 MHz high-frequency linear transducer was used to screen thyroid pathologies. The patient was in a supine position while the thyroid gland was examined using a multi-section scan from the front of the neck. Ultrasound data (Table 1) included nodule composition, echogenicity, shape, margin, and echogenic foci. Two radiologists with 5 and 25 years of thyroid nodule diagnosis expertise blindly reviewed and recorded each patient's features. When two reviewers disagreed during valuation, a collaborative review was done and consensus values were used for statistical analysis.

A single ultrasound image that can represent the focus most comprehensively was selected for each tumor among all the images and then loaded into 3D Slicer software for manual segmentation. A region of interest (ROI) was manually delineated at the boundary of each primary tumor by one experienced radiologist. Then, the ultrasound images were cropped by using the ROI boundary box to remove useless information from the ultrasound images. Ultrasound images were normalized using the linear min-max normalization method:

$${I}_{normalized}=\frac{255\times ({I}_{original}-{\text{min}}\left({I}_{original}\right))}{{\text{max}}\left({I}_{original}\right)-{\text{min}}({I}_{original})}$$

(1)

Hence, the pixel intensity should range from 0 to 255. Figure 2(A) shows the ultrasound image preprocessing.

Feature extraction, feature selection and modeling

Radiomics feature extraction and selection

Figure 2(B) and (C) present the process of feature extraction and feature selection. We extracted a total of 464 radiomics features using an open-source python package for the extraction of radiomics features from medical imaging (PyRadiomics) [23]. These features derived from original image and wavelet image (applying either a high or a low pass filter in each of the two dimensions to the original image and yields 4 decompositions per level) including the first order statistics (18x5 features), shape-based two dimension (9x1 features), gray level co-occurence matrix (GLCM, 22x5 features), gray level run length matrix (GLRLM, 16x5 features), gray level size zone matrix (GLSZM, 16x5 features), neighbouring gray tone difference matrix (NGTDM, 5x5 features), and gray level dependence matrix (GLDM, 14x5 features).

A two-step feature selection strategy was used to reduce the dimensions of the radiomics features. Considering that the radiomics features are continuous variables with a normal distribution, a Student's t-test was first employed to identify features strongly associated with LCLNM status. The Student's t-test is a parametric test that is used to determine if variables in two independent groups have the same distribution. Statistical significance was defined as p-value < 0.05. A total of 238 features that showed a statistically significant difference were retained for the subsequent feature selection. Next, we further selected radiomics features using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) approach, which is a penalized variable selection method appropriate for the regression of high-dimensional data. Since we used 5-fold cross-validation, the radiomics features we selected varied from fold-to-fold. We select radiomics features with a probability of occurrence greater than 60% in 5-fold training dataset. The details of LASSO approach for selecting features are presented in Supplementary Material 1 (including Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary Figures 1-10).

Model development and validation

Figure 2(D) shows the modeling process. Given the small sample and lack of external validation data, we utilized 5-fold cross-validation to split our data into training and test datasets to reduce the bias and risk of overfitting. Namely, the MTC patients were randomly divided into five equal parts, and the regularized logistic regression model was trained only on four parts (training dataset) and tested on the remaining part (test dataset). The probability of the LCLNM positive class $P\left({y}_{i}=1|{X}_{i}\right)$ is as following:

$$\widehat{p}\left({X}_{i}\right)=\frac{1}{1+{\text{exp}}(-{X}_{i}\omega -{\omega }_{0})}$$

(2)

where ${y}_{i}$ takes values in the set {0, 1} for the $i$ th patient, ${X}_{i}$ is features, and $\omega$ and ${\omega }_{0}$ are feature coefficients and intercept. The optimization process is to minimize a cost function:

$$min\,C\sum_{i=1}^{n}(-{y}_{i}{\text{log}}\left(\widehat{p}\left({X}_{i}\right)\right)-(1-{y}_{i}){\text{log}}(1-\widehat{p}\left({X}_{i}\right)))+r(\omega )$$

(3)

where $r(\omega )$ is the regularization penalty term and there are four choices as presented in Supplementary Table 2, and $C$ is the factor to adjust the inverse of regularization strength, and the regularization has the benefit of increasing stability.

For comparison, we established three models using the ultrasound features from TI-RADS, the radiomics features from preoperative thyroid ultrasound images, and the radiomics features combined with TI-RADS, respectively. The three models were separately denoted as TI-RADS model (TM), radiomics model (RM), and radiomics combined with TI-RADS model (RTM). The above features went through the feature selection and standard-scaled steps before being inputted into the models. In parallel, we computed a radiomics score for each patient based on a linear combination of the radiomics features weighted by their coefficients from RM when building RTM.

The hyperparameters for the model included optimizer, regularization penalty term ($r(\omega )$) and inverse of regularization strength ($C$). The optimization algorithm of ‘lbfgs’ was used as optimizer. The l_2 regularization term is applied as penalty. The inverse of regularization strength C is set to 1. The tolerance for stopping criteria is 1e-4. The maximum number of iterations taken for the solvers to converge is 1000.

As we adopted 5-fold cross-validation, the process of feature selection, model training, and testing steps is repeated five times so that each part is given a chance to be the independent test dataset. The analysis described above was implemented in Python software (version 3.8) with scikit-learn package (version 1.1.2).

Model evaluation and statistical analysis

The performance of the model was evaluated by quantitative indexes including the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), Matthew's correlation coefficient (MCC) and F1 score (F1), which are described in Supplementary Material 2.

MTCs with LCLNM negative and positive were compared based on patient demographic information. The Student’s t-test was used to determine whether there was any statistical difference in these features. A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was used as the criterion to indicate a statistically significant difference. Delong’s test was used to test whether there is a statistical difference in LCLNM status prediction for different models.

The decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to test the clinical usefulness of the regularized logistic regression model in LCLNM status prediction. The net benefit of the LCLNM positive group can be calculated as following:

$$Net\,benifit\,treated= \frac{TP}{n}-\frac{FP}{n}\frac{{P}_{t}}{1-{P}_{t}}$$

(4)

where $TP$ is the number of LCLNM positive patients correctly identified as LCLNM positive, $FP$ is the number of LCLNM positive patients identified as LCLNM negative, $n$ is the total number of patients, ${P}_{t}$ is the probability threshold. The details can refer to Supplementary Material 3. The analysis described above was also implemented in Python software (version 3.8).

Results

Patient characteristics

We present in Table 1 the demographic information of MTC patients with LCLNM negative and positive. Of the enrolled 218 MTC patients (Fig. 1), there were 111 (percentage of 50.5%; median age:49, range:13-78; number of male&female:39&72) patients with LCLNM negative and 107 (percentage of 49.5%; median age:50, range:21-75; number of male&female:63&44 ) with LCLNM positive. There were no significant differences between MTC patients with LCLNM negative and positive in age, preoperative ultrasound features of composition, echogenicity, shape, and echogenic foci (all p>0.05). Of the preoperative ultrasound features, smooth or ill-defined margin were more frequent in MTC patients with LCLNM negative while extra-thyroidal extension margin was more frequent in MTC patients with LCLNM positive (p<0.001). TI-RADS level were significant differences between MTC patients in LCLNM negative group and positive group (p<0.05), and MTC patients in LCLNM positive had higher incidences of TI-RADS level (TR5) compared to MTC patients in LCLNM negative.

Selected features and their importance

For TM, the ultrasound features of margin and TI-RADS level (p<0.05) was selected using the Student's t-test and used to establish the model. The coefficients and intercept of the TM in 5-fold cross-validation were summarized in Supplementary Table 3. The feature of margin is the most crucial component in TM.

For RM, a total of 464 radiomics features from preoperative ultrasound imaging was first reduced to 238 (p<0.05) using the Student's t-test, and further reduced to 12 final selected radiomics features using the LASSO approach (the details can refer to Supplementary Material 1). Table 2 demonstrated the final selected radiomics features and their significant differences between LCLNM negative and LCLNM positive groups. We established the RM using the final selected radiomics features. The coefficients and intercept of the RM in 5-fold cross-validation were summarized in Supplementary Table 4. Since the coefficients of different features can reflect the feature importance, we summarized the selected radiomics feature importance (averaged coefficients of 5-fold cross-validation) as shown in Fig. 3. The feature is more important when having the larger absolute value

Table 2

Final selected radiomics features and the significant differences of the medullary thyroid carcinoma patients between lateral cervical lymph node metastases (LCLNM) negative and LCLNM positive. Data are presented as medians with ranges in parentheses

Final radiomics features	LCLNM negative (n=111)	LCLNM positive (n=107)	p-Value
First order statistics
wavelet-HL_firstorder_Median	4.2e-2 (-7.1e-2~0.3)	3.1e-2 (-8.5 e-2~0.1)	<0.001
wavelet-HL_firstorder_Skewness	-2.7e-2 (-14.3~14.4)	0.2 (-10.9~24.1)	0.017
Shape-based features
original_shape2D_MinorAxisLength	145.9 (42.4~550.0)	220.3 (53.1~555.4)	<0.001
GLCM
wavelet-LL_glcm_Imc2	0.98 (0.91~1)	0.98 (0.89~1)	0.042
wavelet-HH_glcm_ClusterProminence	0.5 (0.5~47.4)	0.6 (0.5~19.1)	0.005
wavelet-LL_glcm_ClusterShade	142.8 (-68.4~1303.6)	103.7 (-213.2~1018.4)	0.029
GLSZM
original_glszm_SizeZoneNonUniformity	20.5 (1.9~122.5)	40.7 (3.6~440.9)	<0.001
wavelet-LH_glszm_ZoneEntropy	5.8 (4.3~6.6)	6.0 (4.4~6.6)	<0.001
original_glszm_SmallAreaLowGrayLevelEmphasis	2.8e-02 (0.3e-2~0.1)	3.6e-2 (0.6e-2~0.1)	0.010
waveletLL_glszm_SizeZoneNonUniformity	95.8 (9.8~533.5)	136.8 (9.0~1134.7)	<0.001
NGTDM
wavelet-HH_ngtdm_Strength	7.5e-4 (3.1e-5~0.1)	2.1e-3 (1.9e-5~4.4e-2)	0.001
GLDM
wavelet-HH_gldm_LargeDependenceLowGrayLevelEmphasis	4.6 (0.2~18.6)	2.2 (0.2~19.1)	<0.001

For RTM, we first computed a radiomics score and then combined with TI-RADS features to establish RTM. The coefficients of margin, TI-RADS Level and radiomics score and intercept of the model in 5-fold cross-validation were summarized in Supplementary Table 5. The radiomics score plays the most important role in RTM.

Prediction performance of the models

Figure 4 illustrated the ROC curves of the LCLNM status prediction results of the three models in the 5-fold cross-validation independent test dataset. From the experimental results, the AUCs of the TM were 0.64, 0.66, 0.77, 0.66, and 0.66, respectively, and averaged to be 0.68±0.05 with one standard deviation. The AUCs of the RM were 0.76, 0.72, 0.85, 0.85, and 0.73, respectively, and averaged to be 0.78±0.06 with one standard deviation. The AUCs of the RTM were 0.82, 0.8, 0.9, 0.83, and 0.75, respectively, and averaged to be 0.82±0.05 with one standard deviation. The corresponding quantitative indexes of the three models and the Delong test results on all independent test dataset were summarized in Table 3.

Table 3

Quantitative indexes comparisons of TI-RADS model (TM), Radiomics model (RM) and radiomics combined with TI-RADS model (RTM) in 5-fold cross-validation independent test dataset

Model	AUC	ACC	SEN	SPE	PPV	NPV	MCC	F1
TM
fold 1	0.64	0.56	0.67	0.45	0.54	0.59	0.12	0.6
fold 2	0.66	0.58	0.8	0.39	0.53	0.69	0.21	0.64
fold 3	0.77	0.67	0.86	0.5	0.62	0.79	0.38	0.72
fold 4	0.66	0.56	0.71	0.41	0.54	0.6	0.13	0.61
fold 5	0.66	0.57	0.75	0.36	0.56	0.57	0.12	0.64
Average	0.68	0.59	0.76	0.42	0.56	0.65	0.19	0.64
RM
fold 1	0.76	0.67	0.62	0.73	0.68	0.67	0.35	0.65
fold 2	0.72	0.67	0.6	0.74	0.67	0.68	0.34	0.63
fold 3	0.85	0.7	0.76	0.64	0.67	0.74	0.4	0.71
fold 4	0.85	0.74	0.81	0.68	0.71	0.79	0.49	0.76
fold 5	0.73	0.65	0.67	0.64	0.67	0.64	0.3	0.67
Average	0.78	0.69	0.69	0.69	0.68	0.7	0.38	0.68
RTM
fold 1	0.82	0.77	0.71	0.82	0.79	0.75	0.54	0.75
fold 2	0.8	0.7	0.65	0.74	0.68	0.71	0.39	0.66
fold 3	0.9	0.81	0.9	0.73	0.76	0.89	0.64	0.82
fold 4	0.83	0.79	0.71	0.86	0.83	0.76	0.59	0.77
fold 5	0.75	0.65	0.67	0.64	0.67	0.64	0.3	0.67
Average	0.82	0.74	0.73	0.76	0.75	0.75	0.49	0.73
Significance level of Delong test results for different models
Test dataset	TM & RM			TM & RTM		RM & RTM
All (5-fold)	0.030			<0.001		0.077

The bold value represents the best value of a quantitative index

Clinical utility

Figure 5 illustrates the decision curve of the LCLNM status prediction models in all (5-fold) independent test dataset. The filled net benefit region demonstrated that using LCLNM status prediction models can gain more benefit than treating all MTC patients or treating no MTC patients. The RTM could bring more consistent and significant benefit to MTC patients than TM and RM.

Discussion

Thyroid ultrasound is an effective tool to evaluate the lymph node status in MTC patients [6, 8]. We investigated the association of ultrasound features from TI-RADS and LCLNM status. There were significant differences between LCLNM negative group and LCLNM positive group in margin and TI-RADS levels, and these results are consistent with the previously reported results [9, 24]. Based on the two features, we build the regularized logistic regression model, that is TM, to predict LCLNM status. The feature importance analysis demonstrated that the margin was the more important predictor. Overall, the performance of TM as presented in Table 3 is not so good. Possible reasons may be that the TI-RADS results are commonly influenced by the experience of reviewers and more information from images have not been fully explored, as they are currently relying solely on the naked eye.

Many radiomics studies have investigated the capability for analyzing thyroid carcinoma, including prediction of distant metastases of follicular thyroid carcinoma [14], risk stratification systems for thyroid nodules [15], the differentiation between malignancy and benign thyroid nodules [25], prediction of lymph nodes status [18‐21], prediction of BRAF mutation [26], prediction of malignancy and pathological outcome in patients with papillary thyroid cancer [27]. The relationship between radiomics and MTC, however, is not well understood. As far as we are aware, this study is the first to use radiomics to predict LCLNM in MTC patients. In this study, we extracted 464 radiomics features from ultrasound images and finally selected 12 features (Fig. 3) to establish the RM through a two-step feature selection approach. These features were distributed in first order statistics, GLCM, GLSZM, NGTDM and GLDM (Table 2). Some of these radiomics features, such as Small Area Low Gray Level Emphasis and Size-Zone Non-Uniformity, were similar to the previous study for prediction of distant metastasis of follicular thyroid carcinoma [14]. The Delong test results show the RM is significantly better than the TM (p<0.05) as shown in Table 3. Radiomics features can be taken as more powerful predictors.

Furthermore, we computed the radiomics score, referring to previous studies [14, 15], for each patient based on the selected 12 radiomics features. We established the RTM using the radiomics score, margin and TI-RADS levels. Compared with the RM, the performance of the RTM has been further improved as shown in Table 3, Figs. 3 and 4. The radiomics score played the most important role in the RTM. The Delong test results also show the RTM is significantly better than the TM (p<0.001). Overall, the RTM has the best performance for predicting LCLNM status in MTC patients.

In the absence of enough evidence of LCLNM, it is always questionable whether patients should undergo lymph node dissection. One of the main concerns with LCLNM is the risk of complications associated with extended lymphadenectomy, such as hypoparathyroidism and nerve palsy. Effective preoperative assessment for LCLNM status is essential. The performance of solely TI-RADS system to identify LCLNM in MTC patients is limited. Our model combining TI-RADS system and radiomics features have improved the prediction performance. It improved the ability to identify patients who require lymph node dissection while avoiding surgical complications for those who do not. This model can be used as an aid to clinical decision making when it is not clear to the clinician whether to perform lymph node dissection.

The stability and reproducibility of features are determined by ultrasound images. Ultrasound images can differ depending on the time and location they were taken, who performed the ultrasound with the probe, how much pressure was applied to the skin, patient status (e.g. body habitus, age, underlying medical conditions like skin diseases, or previous surgeries in the area), and other factors. Image normalization is a critical step that makes sure each pixel has a similar data distribution, allowing comparison with other images. Hence, the linear min-max normalization method was used to minimize this impact. On the other hand, we utilized 5-fold cross-validation to reduce the bias and maintain repeatability. Naturally, our current study lacks the validation of external data, and more data samples and involvement from more research centers will be part of our future research efforts in order to further enhance the stability of the model. Furthermore, there is often a gap between the statistical significance of radiomics features and their clinical relevance. Understanding and interpreting what these features represent in terms of underlying pathology can be challenging. This gap suggests that the practical utility of radiomics findings in clinical decision-making was only taken as a supporting tool, not as a decisive one. Additionally, the primary tumor is segmented manually, which limits the workflow's efficiency. The proposed model uses ultrasound information to help guide clinical decision-making solely from an ultrasound imaging perspective, and any other clinical information is not incorporated into the model. In the future study, a fully automated model would be developed that would include an automatic model for tumor segmentation and a radiomics-based and deep learning-based classifier comprising ultrasound and clinical information for LCLNM status prediction to further improve efficiency and accuracy.

Conclusions

We proposed a radiomics-based model that can accurately predict the status of LCLNM in MTC patients, establishing the relationship between the radiomics and ultrasound features in MTC patients. This study is the first to use radiomics analysis to achieve accurate prediction of LCLNM using ultrasound information alone. This model has the potential to serve as an additional tool that helps determine the best course of action for treating this uncommon type of thyroid cancer.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Declarations

The Ethics Committee of Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences approved this retrospective study. The Ethics Committee of Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences waived the requirement for written informed consent due to its retrospective nature. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Kim M, Kim BH. Current guidelines for management of medullary thyroid carcinoma. Endocrinol Metab. 2021;36:514–24.CrossRef

Wells SA, Asa SL, Dralle H, Elisei R, Evans DB, Gagel RF, et al. Revised American Thyroid Association Guidelines for the Management of Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma. Thyroid. 2015;25:567–610.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Stamatakos M, Paraskeva P, Katsaronis P, Tasiopoulou G, Kontzoglou K. Surgical approach to the management of medullary thyroid cancer: when is lymph node dissection needed? Oncology. 2013;84:350–5.CrossRefPubMed

Orloff LA, Kuppersmith RB. American Thyroid Association’s central neck dissection terminology and classification for thyroid cancer consensus statement. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2009.11.013.CrossRefPubMed

Dralle H, Machens A. Surgical management of the lateral neck compartment for metastatic thyroid cancer. Curr Opin Oncol. 2013;25:20–6.CrossRefPubMed

Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, et al. 2015 American thyroid association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American thyroid association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26:1–133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mitchell AL, Gandhi A, Scott-Coombes D, Perros P. Management of thyroid cancer: United Kingdom National Multidisciplinary Guidelines. J Laryngol Otol. 2016;130:S150-60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Grant EG, Tessler FN, Hoang JK, Langer JE, Beland MD, Berland LL, et al. Thyroid ultrasound reporting lexicon: White paper of the ACR thyroid imaging, reporting and data system (TIRADS) committee. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2015.07.011.CrossRefPubMed

Yun G, Kim YK, Choi S Il, Kim J. Medullary thyroid carcinoma: Application of Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) Classification. Endocrine. 2018;61:285–92.

10.

Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures they are data. Radiology. 2016;278:563–77.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Gao XF, Ran X, Ding W. The progress of radiomics in thyroid nodules. Front Oncol. 2023;13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1109319.

12.

Cao Y, Zhong X, Diao W, Mu J, Cheng Y, Jia Z. Radiomics in differentiated thyroid cancer and nodules: explorations, application, and limitations. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13102436.

13.

Lu WW, Zhang D, Ni XJ. A review of the role of ultrasound radiomics and its application and limitations in the investigation of thyroid disease. Med Sci Monit. 2022;28. https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.937738.

14.

Kwon M, Shin JH, Park H, Cho H, Kim E, Hahn SY. Radiomics based on thyroid ultrasound can predict distant metastasis of follicular thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Med. 2020;9:2156.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Park VY, Lee E, Lee HS, Kim HJ, Yoon J, Son J, et al. Combining radiomics with ultrasound-based risk stratification systems for thyroid nodules: an approach for improving performance. Eur Radiol. 2021;31:2405–13.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Zhou H, Jin Y, Dai L, Zhang M, Qiu Y, wang K, et al. Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid nodules using deep learning radiomics of thyroid ultrasound images. Eur J Radiol. 2020;127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.108992.

17.

Yoon J, Lee E, Kang SW, Han K, Park VY, Kwak JY. Implications of US radiomics signature for predicting malignancy in thyroid nodules with indeterminate cytology. Eur Radiol. 2021;31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07670-3.

18.

Liu T, Zhou S, Yu J, Guo Y, Wang Y, Zhou J, et al. Prediction of lymph node metastasis in patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma: a radiomics method based on preoperative ultrasound images. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2019;18:153303381983171.CrossRef

19.

Wen Q, Wang Z, Traverso A, Liu Y, Xu R, Feng Y, et al. A radiomics nomogram for the ultrasound-based evaluation of central cervical lymph node metastasis in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022;13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2022.1064434.

20.

Jiang M, Li C, Tang S, Lv W, Yi A, Wang B, et al. Nomogram based on shear-wave elastography radiomics can improve preoperative cervical lymph node staging for papillary thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid. 2020;30:885–97.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Tong Y, Zhang J, Wei Y, Yu J, Zhan W, Xia H, et al. Ultrasound-based radiomics analysis for preoperative prediction of central and lateral cervical lymph node metastasis in papillary thyroid carcinoma: a multi-institutional study. BMC Med Imaging. 2022;22:82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Yu J, Deng Y, Liu T, Zhou J, Jia X, Xiao T, et al. Lymph node metastasis prediction of papillary thyroid carcinoma based on transfer learning radiomics. Nat Commun. 2020;11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18497-3.

23.

van Griethuysen JJM, Fedorov A, Parmar C, Hosny A, Aucoin N, Narayan V, et al. Computational Radiomics System to Decode the Radiographic Phenotype. Cancer Res. 2017;77:e104-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Oh HS, Kwon H, Song E, Jeon MJ, Song DE, Kim TY, et al. Preoperative clinical and sonographic predictors for lateral cervical lymph node metastases in sporadic medullary thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2017.0514.

25.

Nam SJ, Yoo J, Lee HS, Kim EK, Moon HJ, Yoon JH, et al. Quantitative evaluation for differentiating malignant and benign thyroid nodules using histogram analysis of grayscale sonograms. J Ultrasound Med. 2016. https://doi.org/10.7863/ultra.15.05055.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Kwon M -r., Shin JH, Park H, Cho H, Hahn SY, Park KW. Radiomics Study of Thyroid Ultrasound for Predicting BRAF Mutation in Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma: Preliminary Results. Am J Neuroradiol. 2020;41:700–5.

27.

Paul R, Juliano A, Faquin W, Chan AW. An Artificial Intelligence Ultrasound Platform for Screening and Staging of Thyroid Cancer. Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys. 2022;112:e8.

Titel: Combining radiomics with thyroid imaging reporting and data system to predict lateral cervical lymph node metastases in medullary thyroid cancer
verfasst von: Zhiqiang Liu
Xiwei Zhang
Xiaohui Zhao
Qianqian Guo
Zhengjiang Li
Minghui Wei
Lijuan Niu
Changming An
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2024
Verlag: BioMed Central
Erschienen in: BMC Medical Imaging / Ausgabe 1/2024
Elektronische ISSN: 1471-2342
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-024-01222-7

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Combining radiomics with thyroid imaging reporting and data system to predict lateral cervical lymph node metastases in medullary thyroid cancer