Impact of SUSAN Denoising and ComBat Harmonization on Machine Learning Model Performance for Malignant Brain Neoplasms

Girish Bathla, Neetu Soni, Ian T. Mark, Yanan Liu, Nicholas B. Larson, Blake A. Kassmeyer, Suyash Mohan, John C. Benson, Saima Rathore and Amit K. Agarwal

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Feature variability in radiomics studies due to technical and magnet strength parameters is well-known and may be addressed through various preprocessing methods. However, very few studies have evaluated the downstream impact of variable preprocessing on model classification performance in a multiclass setting. We sought to evaluate the impact of Smallest Univalue Segment Assimilating Nucleus (SUSAN) denoising and Combining Batches harmonization on model classification performance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 493 cases (410 internal and 83 external data sets) of glioblastoma, intracranial metastatic disease, and primary CNS lymphoma underwent semiautomated 3D-segmentation post-baseline image processing (BIP) consisting of resampling, realignment, coregistration, skull-stripping, and image normalization. Post-BIP, 2 sets were generated, one with and another without SUSAN denoising. Radiomics features were extracted from both data sets and batch-corrected to produce 4 data sets: (a) BIP, (b) BIP with SUSAN denoising, (c) BIP with Combining Batches, and (d) BIP with both SUSAN denoising and Combining Batches harmonization. Performance was then summarized for models using a combination of 6 feature-selection techniques and 6 machine learning models across 4 mask-sequence combinations with features derived from 1 to 3 (multiparametric) MRI sequences.

RESULTS: Most top-performing models on the external test set used BIP+SUSAN denoising–derived features. Overall, the use of SUSAN denoising and Combining Batches harmonization led to a slight but generally consistent improvement in model performance on the external test set.

CONCLUSIONS: The use of image-preprocessing steps such as SUSAN denoising and Combining Batches harmonization may be more useful in a multi-institutional setting to improve model generalizability. Models derived from only T1 contrast-enhanced images showed comparable performance to models derived from multiparametric MRI.

ABBREVIATIONS:

BIP
baseline image processing
CE
contrast-enhanced
ComBat
Combining Batches
ET
enhancing tumor
GB
glioblastoma
ICC
intraclass correlation coefficient
IMD
intracranial metastatic disease
mAUC
multiclass area under the receiver operating characteristic curve
ML
machine learning
PCNSL
primary central nervous system lymphomas
PTR
peritumoral region
SD
SUSAN denoising
SUSAN
Smallest Univalue Segment Assimilating Nucleus
View Full Text

Log in through your institution

Advertisement