Prediction of EGFR Mutation Status Based on 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Using Deep Learning-Based Model in Lung Adenocarcinoma
Résumé fourni par la source
Objective The purpose of this study was to develop a deep learning-based system to automatically predict epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant lung adenocarcinoma in 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). Methods Three hundred and one lung adenocarcinoma patients with EGFR mutation status were enrolled in this study. Two deep learning models (SECT and SEPET) were developed with Squeeze-and-Excitation Residual Network (SE-ResNet) module for the prediction of EGFR mutation with CT and PET images, respectively. The deep learning models were trained with a training data set of 198 patients and tested with a testing data set of 103 patients. Stacked generalization was used to integrate the results of SECT and SEPET. Results The AUCs of the SECT and SEPET were 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62–0.80) and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.65–0.82) in the testing data set, respectively. After integrating SECT and SEPET with stacked generalization, the AUC was further improved to 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75–0.90), significantly higher than SECT (p<0.05). Conclusion The stacking model based on 18F-FDG PET/CT images is capable to predict EGFR mutation status of patients with lung adenocarcinoma automatically and non-invasively. The proposed model in this study showed the potential to help clinicians identify suitable advanced patients with lung adenocarcinoma for EGFR‐targeted therapy.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Prediction of EGFR Mutation Status Based on 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Using Deep Learning-Based Model in Lung Adenocarcinoma
- Date Crossref
- 22/07/2021
- Éditeur
- Frontiers Media SA
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.