ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND Radiogenomics uses machine-learning (ML) to directly connect the morphologic and physiological appearance of tumors on clinical imaging with underlying genomic features. Despite extensive growth in the area of radiogenomics across many cancers, and its potential role in advancing clinical decision making, no published studies have directly addressed uncertainty in these model predictions.
METHODS We developed a radiogenomics ML model to quantify uncertainty using transductive Gaussian Processes (GP) and a unique dataset of 95 image-localized biopsies with spatially matched MRI from 25 untreated Glioblastoma (GBM) patients. The model generated predictions for regional EGFR amplification status (a common and important target in GBM) to resolve the intratumoral genetic heterogeneity across each individual tumor - a key factor for future personalized therapeutic paradigms. The model used probability distributions for each sample prediction to quantify uncertainty, and used transductive learning to reduce the overall uncertainty. We compared predictive accuracy and uncertainty of the transductive learning GP model against a standard GP model using leave-one-patient-out cross validation.
RESULTS Predictive uncertainty informed the likelihood of achieving an accurate sample prediction. When stratifying predictions based on uncertainty, we observed substantially higher performance in the group cohort (75% accuracy, n=95) and amongst sample predictions with the lowest uncertainty (83% accuracy, n=72) compared to predictions with higher uncertainty (48% accuracy, n=23), due largely to data interpolation (rather than extrapolation).
CONCLUSION We present a novel approach to quantify radiogenomics uncertainty to enhance model performance and clinical interpretability. This should help integrate more reliable radiogenomics models for improved medical decision-making.
Competing Interest Statement
Competing Interests: US Patents: US8571844B2 (KRS) US Patent Applications: 15/290,963 (LSH, JL); PCT/US2018/061887 (LSH, AHD, JL, KRS); PCT/US2019/019687 (LSH, JL, KRS) Potential conflicts: Precision Oncology Insights (co-founders KRS, LSH) Remaining co-authors have no conflicts of interest with the content of this article.
Funding Statement
NS082609, CA221938, CA220378, NSF-1149602, Mayo Clinic Foundation, James S. McDonnell Foundation, Ivy Foundation, Arizona Biomedical Research Commission
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:
Patients were recruited to this study, Improving diagnostic Accuracy in Brain Patients Using Perfusion MRI, under the protocol procedures approved by the Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) institutional review board.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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
Footnotes
Funding: NS082609, CA221938, CA220378, NSF-1149602, Mayo Clinic Foundation, James S. McDonnell Foundation, Ivy Foundation, Arizona Biomedical Research Commission
Author contributions:
LSH contributed to conception, design of the work, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data
LW contributed to conception, design of the work, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data
AHD contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
JME contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
KS contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
PRJ contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
KCS contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
CPS contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
SP contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
PW contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
JW contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
LCB contributed to design of the work and acquisition of data
KAS contributed to design of the work and acquisition of data
GM contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
AS contributed to acquisition and analysis of data
BRB contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
RSZ contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
CK contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
ABP contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
MMM contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
JMH contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
TW contributed to analysis and interpretation of data
NLT contributed to design of the work, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data
KRS to contributed conception, design of the work, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data
JL to contributed conception, design of the work, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data
Data Availability
Data will be made available upon publication in a peer reviewed journal.