Abstract
Purpose Screening with low-dose computed tomography can reduce lung cancer-related mortality. However, most screen-detected pulmonary abnormalities do not develop into cancer and it remains challenging to identify high-risk nodules among those with indeterminate appearance. We aim to develop and validate prediction models to discriminate between benign and malignant pulmonary lesions based on radiological features.
Methods Using four international lung cancer screening studies, we extracted 2,060 radiomic features for each of 16,797 nodules among 6,865 participants. After filtering out redundant and low-quality radiomic features, 642 radiomic and 9 epidemiologic features remained for model development. We used cross-validation and grid search to assess three machine learning models (XGBoost, Random Forest, LASSO) for their ability to accurately predict risk of malignancy for pulmonary nodules. We fit the top-performing ML model in the full training set. We report model performance based on the area under the curve (AUC) and calibration metrics in the held-out test set.
Results The ML models that yielded the best predictive performance in cross-validation were XGBoost and LASSO, and among these models, LASSO had superior model calibration, which we considered to be the optimal model. We fit the final LASSO model based on the optimized hyperparameter from cross-validation. Our radiomics model was both well-calibrated and had a test-set AUC of 0.930 (95% CI: 0.901-0.957) and out-performed the established Brock model (AUC=0.868, 95% CI: 0.847-0.888) for nodule assessment.
Conclusion We developed highly-accurate machine learning models based on radiomic and epidemiologic features from four international lung cancer screening studies that may be suitable for assessing suspicious, but indeterminate, screen-detected pulmonary nodules for risk of malignancy.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (FDN 167273) and the National Institutes of Health (U19 CA203654).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Research ethics approval for all of the lung cancer screening studies included in the current study are covered by Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) Research Ethics Board (REB) approval for the Integrative Analysis of Lung Cancer (INTEGRAL) project (MSH REB 17-0119-E).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data used in the present study may be made available upon reasonable request to the Integrative Analysis of Lung Cancer Etiology and Risk (INTEGRAL) program upon approval by the Committee.
