Author:
Vestal Brian E.,Ghosh Debashis,Estépar Raúl San José,Kechris Katerina,Fingerlin Tasha,Carlson Nichole E.
Abstract
AbstractQuantitative assessment of emphysema in CT scans has mostly focused on calculating the percentage of lung tissue that is deemed abnormal based on a density thresholding strategy. However, this overall measure of disease burden discards virtually all the spatial information encoded in the scan that is implicitly utilized in a visual assessment. This simplification is likely grouping heterogenous disease patterns and is potentially obscuring clinical phenotypes and variable disease outcomes. To overcome this, several methods that attempt to quantify heterogeneity in emphysema distribution have been proposed. Here, we compare three of those: one based on estimating a power law for the size distribution of contiguous emphysema clusters, a second that looks at the number of emphysema-to-emphysema voxel adjacencies, and a third that applies a parametric spatial point process model to the emphysema voxel locations. This was done using data from 587 individuals from Phase 1 of COPDGene that had an inspiratory CT scan and plasma protein abundance measurements. The associations between these imaging metrics and visual assessment with clinical measures (FEV$$_1$$
1
, FEV$$_1$$
1
-FVC ratio, etc.) and plasma protein biomarker levels were evaluated using a variety of regression models. Our results showed that a selection of spatial measures had the ability to discern heterogeneous patterns among CTs that had similar emphysema burdens. The most informative quantitative measure, average cluster size from the point process model, showed much stronger associations with nearly every clinical outcome examined than existing CT-derived emphysema metrics and visual assessment. Moreover, approximately 75% more plasma biomarkers were found to be associated with an emphysema heterogeneity phenotype when accounting for spatial clustering measures than when they were excluded.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference36 articles.
1. Lozano, R. et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2010. The Lancet 380, 2095–2128 (2012).
2. Rustagi, N. et al. Efficacy and safety of stent, valves, vapour ablation, coils and sealant therapies in advanced emphysema: A meta-analysis. Turk. Thorac. J. 20, 43 (2019).
3. Ceresa, M., Olivares, A. L., Noailly, J. & González Ballester, M. A. Coupled immunological and biomechanical model of emphysema progression. Front. Physiol. 9, 388 (2018).
4. Barr, R. et al. A combined pulmonary-radiology workshop for visual evaluation of COPD: Study design, chest CT findings and concordance with quantitative evaluation. COPD J. Chron. Obstruct. Pulmon. Dis. 9, 151–159 (2012).
5. Cavigli, E. et al. Whole-lung densitometry versus visual assessment of emphysema. Eur. Radiol. 19, 1686–1692 (2009).
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献