Staging and chemotherapy response assessment of bladder cancer using hybrid deep machine learning model on CT scan images.

Authors

null

Waleed Ikram

Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ

Waleed Ikram , Suryadipto Sarkar , Min J. Kong , Haidar Abdul-Muhsin , Cassandra N. Moore , Mark Tyson , Thai Huu Ho , Guru P. Sonpavde , Alvin C. Silva , Irbaz Bin Riaz , Alan Haruo Bryce , Teresa Wu , Parminder Singh

Organizations

Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, FAU Erlangen-Nurnberg, Erlangen, Bavaria, Germany, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, Cape Fear Valley Health Systs, Raleigh, NC, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ

Research Funding

No funding received

Background: Improved computational power and modern algorithms have generated significant interest in radiomics for cancer diagnosis and staging. Here we assess the performance of deep learning (DL) models as a means for feature extraction in combination with supervised machine learning (ML) algorithms for accurate staging and chemotherapy response assessment of bladder cancer. Methods: Deidentified grayscale CT images from bladder cancer patients scheduled to undergo radical cystectomy were included in this retrospective study. These images were manually annotated with two regional masks (normal region and cancer region). Five DL models- namely, AlexNet, GoogleNet, InceptionV3, ResNet-50, and XceptionNet pre-trained on the ImageNet dataset, a public dataset, were then fine-tuned on our bladder CT scan data to extract features. Through feature selection process, the subset of the features was used to build ML classifiers for classification. The classification was performed using five different ML classifiers, namely k-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Naïve-Bayes (NB), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), and Decision Tree (DT). The classification task was performed with 10-fold cross-validation, and each of the experiments contained a different but not mutually exclusive subset of samples. The evaluation metrics include accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1-score. Results: A total of 200 deidentified grayscale CT images of 100 patients with histologically proven bladder cancer, were included in this study. For experiment (1) normal vs. cancer, the LDA classifier on XceptionNet based features provides the best performance with an accuracy of 86.07%, sensitivity of 96.75%, specificity of 69.65%, precision of 83.07%, and F1-score of 89.39%. For experiment (2) non-muscle invasive Cancer (NMIBC) vs. muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), the LDA classifier on XceptionNet based features provided the best performance with an accuracy of 79.72%, sensitivity of 66.62%, specificity of 87.39%, precision of 75.58%, and F1-score of 70.81%. For experiment (3) T0 lesion vs. MIBC, the LDA classifier on XceptionNet based features provides the best performance with an accuracy of 74.96%, sensitivity of 80.51%, specificity of 70.22%, precision of 69.78%, and F1-score of 74.73%. Conclusions: Our proposed model has shown good results in differentiating normal vs cancer and promising performance in differentiating T0 vs MIBC after chemotherapy treatment. We are expanding our dataset to further improve the performance in differentiating T0 vs MIBC. In addition, we will investigate the applicability of GAN for data augmentation to address data limit. We believe the hybrid DL and ML framework may facilitates radiologists' decisions and clinical decision-making in patients with bladder cancer.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Genitourinary Cancer—Kidney and Bladder

Track

Genitourinary Cancer—Kidney and Bladder

Sub Track

Urothelial Cancer - Local-Regional Disease

Citation

J Clin Oncol 40, 2022 (suppl 16; abstr e16550)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.e16550

Abstract #

e16550

Abstract Disclosures