Radiomics of NSCLC: Quantitative CT Image Feature Characterization and Tumor Shrinkage Prediction

Radiomics is the high-throughput extraction and analysis of quantitative image features. For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, radiomics can be applied to standard of care computed tomography (CT) images to improve tumor diagnosis, staging, and response assessment. The first objective of this work was to show that CT image features extracted from pre-treatment NSCLC tumors could be used to predict tumor shrinkage in response to therapy. This is important since tumor shrinkage is an important cancer treatment endpoint that is correlated with probability of disease progression and overall survival. Accurate prediction of tumor shrinkage could also lead to individually customized treatment plans. To accomplish this objective, 64 stage NSCLC patients with similar treatments were all imaged using the same CT scanner and protocol. Quantitative image features were extracted and principal component regression with simulated annealing subset selection was used to predict shrinkage. Cross validation and permutation tests were used to validate the results. The optimal model gave a strong correlation between the observed and predicted shrinkages with . The second objective of this work was to identify sets of NSCLC CT image features that are reproducible, non-redundant, and informative across multiple machines. Feature sets with these qualities are needed for NSCLC radiomics models to be robust to machine variation and spurious correlation. To accomplish this objective, test-retest CT image pairs were obtained from 56 NSCLC patients imaged on three CT machines from two institutions. For each machine, quantitative image features with concordance correlation coefficient values greater than 0.90 were considered reproducible. Multi-machine reproducible feature sets were created by taking the intersection of individual machine reproducible feature sets. Redundant features were removed through hierarchical clustering. The findings showed that image feature reproducibility and redundancy depended on both the CT machine and the CT image type (average cine 4D-CT imaging vs. end-exhale cine 4D-CT imaging vs. helical inspiratory breath-hold 3D CT). For each image type, a set of cross-machine reproducible, non-redundant, and informative image features was identified. Compared to end-exhale 4D-CT and breath-hold 3D-CT, average 4D-CT derived image features showed superior multi-machine reproducibility and are the best candidates for clinical correlation.

Comparison of Tumor Shrinkage and Cumulative Dose Distribution for Lung Cancers

Background: The physical characteristic of protons is that they deliver most of their radiation dose to the target volume and deliver no dose to the normal tissue distal to the tumor. Previously, numerous studies have shown unique advantages of proton therapy over intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in conforming dose to the tumor and sparing dose to the surrounding normal tissues and the critical structures in many clinical sites. However, proton therapy is known to be more sensitive to treatment uncertainties such as inter- and intra-fractional variations in patient anatomy. To date, no study has clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of proton therapy compared with the conventional IMRT under the consideration of both respiratory motion and tumor shrinkage in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Purpose: This thesis investigated two questions for establishing a clinically relevant comparison of the two different modalities (IMRT and proton therapy). The first question was whether or not there are any differences in tumor shrinkage between patients randomized to IMRT versus passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT). Tumor shrinkage is considered a standard measure of radiation therapy response that has been widely used to gauge a short-term progression of radiation therapy. The second question was whether or not there are any differences between the planned dose and 5D dose under the influence of inter- and intra-fractional variations in the patient anatomy for both modalities. Methods: A total of 45 patients (25 IMRT patients and 20 PSPT patients) were used to quantify the tumor shrinkage in terms of the change of the primary gross tumor volume (GTVp). All patients were randomized to receive either IMRT or PSPT for NSCLC. Treatment planning goals were identical for both groups. All patients received 5 to 8 weekly repeated 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scans during the course of radiation treatments. The original GTVp contours were propagated to T50 of weekly 4DCT images using deformable image registration and their absolute volumes were measured. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the distribution of tumor shrinkage between the two population groups. In order to investigate the difference between the planned dose and the 5D dose with consideration of both breathing motion and anatomical change, we re-calculated new dose distributions at every phase of the breathing cycle for all available weekly 4DCT data sets which resulted 50 to 80 individual dose calculations for each of the 7 patients presented in this thesis. The newly calculated dose distributions were then deformed and accumulated to T50 of the planning 4DCT for comparison with the planned dose distribution. Results: At the end of the treatment, both IMRT and PSPT groups showed mean tumor volume reductions of 23.6% ( 19.2%) and 20.9% ( 17.0 %) respectively. Moreover, the mean difference in tumor shrinkage between two groups is 3% along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval, [-8%, 14%]. The rate of tumor shrinkage was highly correlated with the initial tumor volume size. For the planning dose and 5D dose comparison study, all 7 patients showed a mean difference of 1 % in terms of target coverage for both IMRT and PSPT treatment plans. Conclusions: The results of the tumor shrinkage investigation showed no statistically significant difference in tumor shrinkage between the IMRT and PSPT patients, and the tumor shrinkage between the two modalities is similar based on the 95% confidence interval. From the pilot study of comparing the planned dose with the 5D dose, we found the difference to be only 1%. Overall impression of the two modalities in terms of treatment response as measured by the tumor shrinkage and 5D dose under the influence of anatomical change that were designed under the same protocol (i.e. randomized trial) showed similar result.