Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Insights into Imaging
Published in: Insights into Imaging 6/2012

Open Access 01-12-2012 | Review

Assessment of tumor heterogeneity: an emerging imaging tool for clinical practice?

Authors: Fergus Davnall, Connie S. P. Yip, Gunnar Ljungqvist, Mariyah Selmi, Francesca Ng, Bal Sanghera, Balaji Ganeshan, Kenneth A. Miles, Gary J. Cook, Vicky Goh

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 6/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Tumor spatial heterogeneity is an important prognostic factor, which may be reflected in medical images

Methods

Image texture analysis is an approach of quantifying heterogeneity that may not be appreciated by the naked eye. Different methods can be applied including statistical-, model-, and transform-based methods.

Results

Early evidence suggests that texture analysis has the potential to augment diagnosis and characterization as well as improve tumor staging and therapy response assessment in oncological practice.

Conclusion

This review provides an overview of the application of texture analysis with different imaging modalities, CT, MRI, and PET, to date and describes the technical challenges that have limited its widespread clinical implementation so far. With further efforts to refine its application, image texture analysis has the potential to develop into a valuable clinical tool for oncologic imaging.

Teaching Points

• Tumor spatial heterogeneity is an important prognostic factor.
• Image texture analysis is an approach of quantifying heterogeneity.
• Different methods can be applied, including statistical-, model-, and transform-based methods.
• Texture analysis could improve the diagnosis, tumor staging, and therapy response assessment.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Hockel M, Knoop C, Schlenger K et al (1993) Intratumoral pO2 predicts survival in advanced cancer of the uterine cervix. Radiother Oncol 26(1):45–50PubMedCrossRef
2.
Yang Z, Tang LH, Klimstra DS (2011) Effect of tumor heterogeneity on the assessment of Ki67 labeling index in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors metastatic to the liver: implications for prognostic stratification. Am J Surg Pathol 35(6):853–860PubMedCrossRef
3.
Hockel M, Schlenger K, Aral B, Mitze M, Schaffer U, Vaupel P (1996) Association between tumor hypoxia and malignant progression in advanced cancer of the uterine cervix. Cancer Res 56(19):4509–4515PubMed
4.
Castellano G, Bonilha L, Li LM, Cendes F (2004) Texture analysis of medical images. Clin Radiol 59(12):1061–1069PubMedCrossRef
5.
Al-Kadi OS, Watson D (2008) Texture analysis of aggressive and nonaggressive lung tumor CE CT images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 55(7):1822–1830PubMedCrossRef
6.
Ganeshan B, Miles KA, Young RC, Chatwin CR (2007) Hepatic entropy and uniformity: additional parameters that can potentially increase the effectiveness of contrast enhancement during abdominal CT. Clin Radiol 62(8):761–768PubMedCrossRef
7.
Brown RA, Frayne R (2008) A comparison of texture quantification techniques based on the Fourier and S transforms. Med Phys 35(11):4998–5008PubMedCrossRef
8.
Goh V, Sanghera B, Wellsted DM, Sundin J, Halligan S (2009) Assessment of the spatial pattern of colorectal tumour perfusion estimated at perfusion CT using two-dimensional fractal analysis. Eur Radiol 19(6):1358–1365PubMedCrossRef
9.
Sanghera B, Banerjee D, Khan A et al (2012) Reproducibility of 2D and 3D Fractal Analysis Techniques for the Assessment of Spatial Heterogeneity of Regional Blood Flow in Rectal Cancer. Radiology 263(3):865–873PubMedCrossRef
10.
Craciunescu OI, Das SK, Clegg ST (1999) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and fractal characteristics of percolation clusters in two-dimensional tumor blood perfusion. J Biomech Eng 121(5):480–486PubMedCrossRef
11.
Dettori L, Semler L (2007) A comparison of wavelet, ridgelet, and curvelet-based texture classification algorithms in computed tomography. Comput Biol Med 37(4):486–498PubMedCrossRef
12.
Al-Kadi OS (2010) Assessment of texture measures susceptibility to noise in conventional and contrast enhanced computed tomography lung tumour images. Comput Med Imaging Graph 34(6):494–503PubMedCrossRef
13.
Tuceryan M, Jain AK (1998) Texture analysis. In: Chen CH, Pau LF, Wang PSP (eds) The Handbook of Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision. World Scientific Publishing Co, Singapore, pp 207–248
14.
Amadasun M, King R (1989) Textural features corresponding to textural properties. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 19:1264–1274CrossRef
15.
Srinivasan GN, Shobha G (2008) Statistical texture analysis. Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 36:1264–1269
16.
Harlow CA, Eisenbeis SA (1973) The analysis of radiographic images. IEEE Trans Comput C22:678–689CrossRef
17.
Chen DR, Chang RF, Huang YL (1999) Computer-aided diagnosis applied to US of solid breast nodules by using neural networks. Radiology 213(2):407–412PubMedCrossRef
18.
Tourassi GD (1999) Journey toward computer-aided diagnosis: role of image texture analysis. Radiology 213(2):317–320PubMedCrossRef
19.
Eliat PA, Olivie D, Saikali S, Carsin B, Saint-Jalmes H, de Certaines JD (2012) Can dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging combined with texture analysis differentiate malignant glioneuronal tumors from other glioblastoma? Neurol Res Int 2012:195176PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
Mayerhoefer ME, Schima W, Trattnig S, Pinker K, Berger-Kulemann V, Ba-Ssalamah A (2010) Texture-based classification of focal liver lesions on MRI at 3.0 Tesla: a feasibility study in cysts and hemangiomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 32(2):352–359PubMedCrossRef
21.
Lopes R, Ayache A, Makni N et al (2011) Prostate cancer characterization on MR images using fractal features. Med Phys 38(1):83–95PubMedCrossRef
22.
Holli K, Laaperi AL, Harrison L et al (2010) Characterization of breast cancer types by texture analysis of magnetic resonance images. Acad Radiol 17(2):135–141PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zacharaki EI, Wang S, Chawla S et al (2009) Classification of brain tumor type and grade using MRI texture and shape in a machine learning scheme. Magn Reson Med 62(6):1609–1618PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Alic L, van Vliet M, van Dijke CF, Eggermont AM, Veenland JF, Niessen WJ (2011) Heterogeneity in DCE-MRI parametric maps: a biomarker for treatment response? Phys Med Biol 56(6):1601–1616PubMedCrossRef
25.
Assefa D, Keller H, Menard C, Laperriere N, Ferrari RJ, Yeung I (2010) Robust texture features for response monitoring of glioblastoma multiforme on T1-weighted and T2-FLAIR MR images: a preliminary investigation in terms of identification and segmentation. Med Phys 37(4):1722–1736PubMedCrossRef
26.
Karahaliou A, Vassiou K, Arikidis NS, Skiadopoulos S, Kanavou T, Costaridou L (2010) Assessing heterogeneity of lesion enhancement kinetics in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer diagnosis. Br J Radiol 83(988):296–309PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
27.
Harrison LC, Luukkaala T, Pertovaara H et al (2009) Non-Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation with MRI texture classification. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 28:87PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
O’Connor JP, Rose CJ, Jackson A et al (2011) DCE-MRI biomarkers of tumour heterogeneity predict CRC liver metastasis shrinkage following bevacizumab and FOLFOX-6. Br J Cancer 105(1):139–145PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Rose CJ, Mills SJ, O’Connor JP et al (2009) Quantifying spatial heterogeneity in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameter maps. Magn Reson Med 62(2):488–499PubMedCrossRef
30.
El Naqa I, Grigsby P, Apte A et al (2009) Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes. Pattern Recognit 42(6):1162–1171PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Hatt M et al (2011) Intratumor heterogeneity characterized by textural features on baseline 18 F-FDG PET images predicts response to concomitant radiochemotherapy in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 52(3):369–378PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Ganeshan B, Burnand K, Young R, Chatwin C, Miles K (2011) Dynamic contrast-enhanced texture analysis of the liver: initial assessment in colorectal cancer. Invest Radiol 46(3):160–168PubMedCrossRef
33.
Ganeshan B, Skogen K, Pressney I, Coutroubis D, Miles K (2012) Tumour heterogeneity in oesophageal cancer assessed by CT texture analysis: preliminary evidence of an association with tumour metabolism, stage, and survival. Clin Radiol 67(2):157–164PubMedCrossRef
34.
Ganeshan B, Abaleke S, Young RC, Chatwin CR, Miles KA (2010) Texture analysis of non-small cell lung cancer on unenhanced computed tomography: initial evidence for a relationship with tumour glucose metabolism and stage. Cancer Imaging 10:137–143PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
Ganeshan B, Goh V, Mandeville H, Ng QS, Hoskin P, Miles KA (In press) CT of non-small cell lung cancer: Histopathological correlates for texture parameters. Radiology.
36.
Kido S, Kuriyama K, Higashiyama M, Kasugai T, Kuroda C (2003) Fractal analysis of internal and peripheral textures of small peripheral bronchogenic carcinomas in thin-section computed tomography: comparison of bronchioloalveolar cell carcinomas with nonbronchioloalveolar cell carcinomas. J Comput Assist Tomogr 27(1):56–61PubMedCrossRef
37.
Kido S, Kuriyama K, Higashiyama M, Kasugai T, Kuroda C (2002) Fractal analysis of small peripheral pulmonary nodules in thin-section CT: evaluation of the lung-nodule interfaces. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26(4):573–578PubMedCrossRef
38.
Huang YL, Chen JH, Shen WC (2006) Diagnosis of hepatic tumors with texture analysis in nonenhanced computed tomography images. Acad Radiol 13(6):713–720PubMedCrossRef
39.
Cui C, Cai H, Liu L, Li L, Tian H (2011) Quantitative analysis and prediction of regional lymph node status in rectal cancer based on computed tomography imaging. Eur Radiol 21(11):2318–2325PubMedCrossRef
40.
Skogen K, Ganeshan B, Good T, Critchley G, Miles KA (2011) Imaging heterogeneity in gliomas using texture analysis. Cancer Imaging, 11 Spec No A:S113.
41.
Goh V, Ganeshan B, Nathan P, Juttla JK, Vinayan A, Miles KA (2011) Assessment of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic renal cell cancer: CT texture as a predictive biomarker. Radiology 261(1):165–171PubMedCrossRef
42.
Ganeshan B, Miles KA, Young RC, Chatwin CR (2007) In search of biologic correlates for liver texture on portal-phase CT. Acad Radiol 14(9):1058–1068PubMedCrossRef
43.
Miles KA, Ganeshan B, Griffiths MR, Young RC, Chatwin CR (2009) Colorectal cancer: texture analysis of portal phase hepatic CT images as a potential marker of survival. Radiology 250(2):444–452PubMedCrossRef
44.
Ganeshan B, Panayiotou E, Burnand K, Dizdarevic S, Miles K (2012) Tumour heterogeneity in non-small cell lung carcinoma assessed by CT texture analysis: a potential marker of survival. Eur Radiol 22(4):796–802PubMedCrossRef
45.
James D, Clymer BD, Schmalbrock P (2001) Texture detection of simulated microcalcification susceptibility effects in magnetic resonance imaging of breasts. J Magn Reson Imaging 13(6):876–881PubMedCrossRef
46.
Gibbs P, Turnbull LW (2003) Textural analysis of contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. Magn Reson Med 50(1):92–98PubMedCrossRef
47.
Chen W, Giger ML, Li H, Bick U, Newstead GM (2007) Volumetric texture analysis of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. Magn Reson Med 58(3):562–571PubMedCrossRef
48.
Woods BJ, Clymer BD, Kurc T et al (2007) Malignant-lesion segmentation using 4D co-occurrence texture analysis applied to dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance breast image data. J Magn Reson Imaging 25(3):495–501PubMedCrossRef
49.
Lv D, Guo X, Wang X, Zhang J, Fang J (2009) Computerized characterization of prostate cancer by fractal analysis in MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging 30(1):161–168PubMedCrossRef
50.
Eary JF, O’Sullivan F, O’Sullivan J, Conrad EU (2008) Spatial heterogeneity in sarcoma 18 F-FDG uptake as a predictor of patient outcome. J Nucl Med 49(12):1973–1979PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Yu H, Caldwell C, Mah K, Mozeg D (2009) Coregistered FDG PET/CT-based textural characterization of head and neck cancer for radiation treatment planning. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 28(3):374–383PubMedCrossRef
52.
Yu H, Caldwell C, Mah K et al (2009) Automated radiation targeting in head-and-neck cancer using region-based texture analysis of PET and CT images. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 75(2):618–625PubMedCrossRef
53.
Mayerhoefer ME, Szomolanyi P, Jirak D, Materka A, Trattnig S (2009) Effects of MRI acquisition parameter variations and protocol heterogeneity on the results of texture analysis and pattern discrimination: an application-oriented study. Med Phys 36(4):1236–1243PubMedCrossRef
54.
Galavis PE, Hollensen C, Jallow N, Paliwal B, Jeraj R (2010) Variability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters. Acta Oncol 49(7):1012–1016PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
55.
Waugh SA, Lerski RA, Bidaut L, Thompson AM (2011) The influence of field strength and different clinical breast MRI protocols on the outcome of texture analysis using foam phantoms. Med Phys 38(9):5058–5066PubMedCrossRef
56.
Collewet G, Strzelecki M, Mariette F (2004) Influence of MRI acquisition protocols and image intensity normalization methods on texture classification. Magn Reson Imaging 22(1):81–91PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Assessment of tumor heterogeneity: an emerging imaging tool for clinical practice?
Authors
Fergus Davnall
Connie S. P. Yip
Gunnar Ljungqvist
Mariyah Selmi
Francesca Ng
Bal Sanghera
Balaji Ganeshan
Kenneth A. Miles
Gary J. Cook
Vicky Goh
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Insights into Imaging / Issue 6/2012
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-012-0196-6

Other articles of this Issue 6/2012

Insights into Imaging 6/2012 Go to the issue

Pictorial Review

Comparison of CT and MR imaging in ischemic stroke

Review

Insights into imaging of aortitis

Original Article

The rim sign: FDG-PET/CT pattern of pulmonary infarction

Original Article

Radiographers’ self-assessed level and use of competencies—a national survey

Statement of Clarification

Statement of clarification

Original Article

Should less motion sensitive T2-weighted BLADE TSE replace Cartesian TSE for female pelvic MRI?