Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging 2023; 33(03): 338-343
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1767786
Original Article

A Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Survival Prediction of Patients with Glioma Using Radiomic Features from MRI Scans

Madhumitha Manjunath‡   *
1   Department of Biotechnology, People's Education Society University, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Shayana Saravanakumar  ‡   *
1   Department of Biotechnology, People's Education Society University, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Shreya Kiran‡   *
1   Department of Biotechnology, People's Education Society University, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Jhinuk Chatterjee 
1   Department of Biotechnology, People's Education Society University, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations Funding This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Glioma is a primary, malignant, highly aggressive brain tumor, with patients having an average life expectancy of 14 to 16 months after diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of these patients can be used to extract and analyze quantifiable features with potential clinical significance. We hypothesize that there is a correlation between radiomic features extracted from MRI scans and survival. Along with clinical data, the radiomic features could be used in survival prediction of patients, providing beneficial information for clinicians to design personalized treatment plans.

Methods In our study, we have utilized 3D Slicer for tumor segmentation and feature extraction and performed survival prediction of patients with glioma using four different machine learning models.

Results and Conclusion Among the models compared, we have achieved a maximum prediction accuracy of 64.4% using the k-nearest neighbors model, which was trained and tested on a combination of clinical data and radiomic features extracted from MRI images provided in the BraTS 2020 dataset.

Keywords

survival prediction - feature extraction - MRI - naïve Bayes - random forest - k-nearest neighbors

Author Contributions

The idea was conceived by all the authors. S.K. and M.M. performed feature extraction using the 3D Slicer software. S.S. performed the data visualization, coding for the four machine learning models, and implementation of survival prediction using R programming. The manuscript was prepared by all the authors. J.C. supervised the study and also reviewed and finalized the manuscript.


* These authors have contributed equally to the work.




Publication History

Article published online:
28 April 2023

© 2023. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Ahola M, Uusitalo S, Palva L, Sepponen R. Scaling the magnetic resonance imaging through design research. In: Ahram T, Taiar R. eds. Human Interaction, Emerging Technologies and Future Systems V. IHIET 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. Vol. 319. Cham: Springer; 2022
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021. . Accessed on December 9, 2022 at: https://www.R-project.org/
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Menze BH, Jakab A, Bauer S. et al. The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS). IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2015; 34 (10) 1993-2024
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J. et al. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 30 (09) 1323-1341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Donahue MJ, Blakeley JO, Zhou J, Pomper MG, Laterra J, van Zijl PC. Evaluation of human brain tumor heterogeneity using multiple T1-based MRI signal weighting approaches. Magn Reson Med 2008; 59 (02) 336-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rathi VP, Palani S. Brain tumor MRI image classification with feature selection and extraction using linear discriminant analysis. 2012. arXiv:1208.2128
    Google Scholar
  • 7 van Griethuysen JJM, Fedorov A, Parmar C. et al. Computational radiomics system to decode the radiographic phenotype. Cancer Res 2017; 77 (21) e104-e107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wickham H. Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Neuwirth E. RColorBrewer: ColorBrewer Palettes. R package version 1.1–3. 2022. Accessed on December 9, 2022 at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RColorBrewer
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Sun L, Zhang S, Chen H, Luo L. Brain tumor segmentation and survival prediction using multimodal MRI scans with deep learning. Front Neurosci 2019; 13: 810
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J. et al. Welcome to the tidyverse. J Open Source Softw 2019; 4 (43) 1686
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kuhn M. . caret: Classification and Regression Training. R package version 6.0–93. 2022. Accessed on December 9, 2022 at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=caret
  • 13 Liaw A, Wiener M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2002; 2 (03) 18-22
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Zhao H, Williams GJ, Huang JZ. Wsrf: an R package for classification with scalable weighted subspace random forests. J Stat Softw 2017; 77 (03) 1-30
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar