↓ Skip to main content

Machine learning-based quantitative texture analysis of CT images of small renal masses: Differentiation of angiomyolipoma without visible fat from renal cell carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in European Radiology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
187 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
Machine learning-based quantitative texture analysis of CT images of small renal masses: Differentiation of angiomyolipoma without visible fat from renal cell carcinoma
Published in
European Radiology, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00330-017-5118-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhichao Feng, Pengfei Rong, Peng Cao, Qingyu Zhou, Wenwei Zhu, Zhimin Yan, Qianyun Liu, Wei Wang

Abstract

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of machine-learning based quantitative texture analysis of CT images to differentiate small (≤ 4 cm) angiomyolipoma without visible fat (AMLwvf) from renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This single-institutional retrospective study included 58 patients with pathologically proven small renal mass (17 in AMLwvf and 41 in RCC groups). Texture features were extracted from the largest possible tumorous regions of interest (ROIs) by manual segmentation in preoperative three-phase CT images. Interobserver reliability and the Mann-Whitney U test were applied to select features preliminarily. Then support vector machine with recursive feature elimination (SVM-RFE) and synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) were adopted to establish discriminative classifiers, and the performance of classifiers was assessed. Of the 42 extracted features, 16 candidate features showed significant intergroup differences (P < 0.05) and had good interobserver agreement. An optimal feature subset including 11 features was further selected by the SVM-RFE method. The SVM-RFE+SMOTE classifier achieved the best performance in discriminating between small AMLwvf and RCC, with the highest accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and AUC of 93.9 %, 87.8 %, 100 % and 0.955, respectively. Machine learning analysis of CT texture features can facilitate the accurate differentiation of small AMLwvf from RCC. • Although conventional CT is useful for diagnosis of SRMs, it has limitations. • Machine-learning based CT texture analysis facilitate differentiation of small AMLwvf from RCC. • The highest accuracy of SVM-RFE+SMOTE classifier reached 93.9 %. • Texture analysis combined with machine-learning methods might spare unnecessary surgery for AMLwvf.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 124 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Other 11 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Researcher 6 5%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 50 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 31%
Computer Science 8 6%
Engineering 5 4%
Psychology 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 60 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,986,372
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from European Radiology
#2,851
of 4,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,387
of 326,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Radiology
#42
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,183 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,182 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.