The Image Biomarker Standardization Initiative validated consensus-based reference values for 169 radiomics features, thus enabling calibration and verification of radiomics software. Key results: • research teams found agreement for calculation of 169 radiomics features derived from a digital phantom and a human lung cancer on CT scan. • Of these 169 candidate radiomics features, good to excellent reproducibility was achieved for 167 radiomics features using MRI, 18F-FDG PET and CT images obtained in 51 patients with soft-tissue sarcoma.

Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing ‘translational gaps’ through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored ‘roadmap’. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.

BackgroundTumor spatial heterogeneity is an important prognostic factor, which may be reflected in medical imagesMethodsImage 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.ResultsEarly 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.ConclusionThis 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.

(18)F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) is now routinely used in oncological imaging for diagnosis and staging and increasingly to determine early response to treatment, often employing semiquantitative measures of lesion activity such as the standardized uptake value (SUV). However, the ability to predict the behaviour of a tumour in terms of future therapy response or prognosis using SUVs from a baseline scan prior to treatment is limited. It is recognized that medical images contain more useful information than may be perceived with the naked eye, leading to the field of "radiomics" whereby additional features can be extracted by computational postprocessing techniques. In recent years, evidence has slowly accumulated showing that parameters obtained by texture analysis of radiological images, reflecting the underlying spatial variation and heterogeneity of voxel intensities within a tumour, may yield additional predictive and prognostic information. It is hoped that measurement of these textural features may allow better tissue characterization as well as better stratification of treatment in clinical trials, or individualization of future cancer treatment in the clinic, than is possible with current imaging biomarkers. In this review we focus on the literature describing the emerging methods of texture analysis in (18)FDG PET/CT, as well as other imaging modalities, and how the measurement of spatial variation of voxel grey-scale intensity within an image may provide additional predictive and prognostic information, and postulate the underlying biological mechanisms.

IntroductionBreast cancer remains a significant scientific, clinical and societal challenge. This gap analysis has reviewed and critically assessed enduring issues and new challenges emerging from recent research, and proposes strategies for translating solutions into practice.MethodsMore than 100 internationally recognised specialist breast cancer scientists, clinicians and healthcare professionals collaborated to address nine thematic areas: genetics, epigenetics and epidemiology; molecular pathology and cell biology; hormonal influences and endocrine therapy; imaging, detection and screening; current/novel therapies and biomarkers; drug resistance; metastasis, angiogenesis, circulating tumour cells, cancer ‘stem’ cells; risk and prevention; living with and managing breast cancer and its treatment. The groups developed summary papers through an iterative process which, following further appraisal from experts and patients, were melded into this summary account.ResultsThe 10 major gaps identified were: (1) understanding the functions and contextual interactions of genetic and epigenetic changes in normal breast development and during malignant transformation; (2) how to implement sustainable lifestyle changes (diet, exercise and weight) and chemopreventive strategies; (3) the need for tailored screening approaches including clinically actionable tests; (4) enhancing knowledge of molecular drivers behind breast cancer subtypes, progression and metastasis; (5) understanding the molecular mechanisms of tumour heterogeneity, dormancy, de novo or acquired resistance and how to target key nodes in these dynamic processes; (6) developing validated markers for chemosensitivity and radiosensitivity; (7) understanding the optimal duration, sequencing and rational combinations of treatment for improved personalised therapy; (8) validating multimodality imaging biomarkers for minimally invasive diagnosis and monitoring of responses in primary and metastatic disease; (9) developing interventions and support to improve the survivorship experience; (10) a continuing need for clinical material for translational research derived from normal breast, blood, primary, relapsed, metastatic and drug-resistant cancers with expert bioinformatics support to maximise its utility. The proposed infrastructural enablers include enhanced resources to support clinically relevant in vitro and in vivo tumour models; improved access to appropriate, fully annotated clinical samples; extended biomarker discovery, validation and standardisation; and facilitated cross-discipline working.ConclusionsWith resources to conduct further high-quality targeted research focusing on the gaps identified, increased knowledge translating into improved clinical care should be achievable within five years.

FRCR Purpose:To determine if computed tomographic (CT) texture features of primary colorectal cancer are related to 5-year overall survival rate. Materials and Methods:Institutional review board waiver was obtained for this retrospective analysis. Texture features of the entire primary tumor were assessed with contrast material-enhanced staging CT studies obtained in 57 patients as part of an ethically approved study and by using proprietary software. Entropy, uniformity, kurtosis, skewness, and standard deviation of the pixel distribution histogram were derived from CT images without filtration and with filter values corresponding to fine (1.0), medium (1.5, 2.0), and coarse (2.5) textures. Patients were followed up until death and were censored at 5 years if they were still alive. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine the relationship, if any, between CT texture and 5-year overall survival rate.The Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess independence of texture parameters from stage. Results:Follow-up data were available for 55 of 57 patients. There were eight stage I, 19 stage II, 17 stage III, and 11 stage IV cancers. Fine-texture feature Kaplan-Meier survival plots for entropy, uniformity, kurtosis, skewness, and standard deviation of the pixel distribution histogram were significantly different for tumors above and below each respective threshold receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve optimal cutoff value (P = .001, P = .018, P = .032, P = .008, and P = .001, respectively), with poorer prognosis for ROC optimal values (a) less than 7.89 for entropy, (b) at least 0.01 for uniformity, (c) less than 2.48 for kurtosis, (d) at least 20.38 for skewness, and (e) less than 61.83 for standard deviation. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed that each parameter was independent from the stage predictor of overall survival rate (P = .001, P = .009, P = .006, P = .02, and P = .001, respectively). Conclusion:Fine-texture features are associated with poorer 5-year overall survival rate in patients with primary colorectal cancer.q RSNA, 2012 Supplemental material: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup /suppl

There is evidence in some solid tumors that textural features of tumoral uptake in 18 F-FDG PET images are associated with response to chemoradiotherapy and survival. We have investigated whether a similar relationship exists in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Fifty-three patients (mean age, 65.8 y; 31 men, 22 women) with NSCLC treated with chemoradiotherapy underwent pretreatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT scans. Response was assessed by CT Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) at 12 wk. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local PFS (LPFS) were recorded. Primary tumor texture was measured by the parameters coarseness, contrast, busyness, and complexity. The following parameters were also derived from the PET data: primary tumor standardized uptake values (SUVs) (mean SUV, maximum SUV, and peak SUV), metabolic tumor volume, and total lesion glycolysis. Results: Compared with nonresponders, RECIST responders showed lower coarseness (mean, 0.012 vs. 0.027; P 5 0.004) and higher contrast (mean, 0.11 vs. 0.044; P 5 0.002) and busyness (mean, 0.76 vs. 0.37; P 5 0.027). Neither complexity nor any of the SUV parameters predicted RECIST response. By Kaplan-Meier analysis, OS, PFS, and LPFS were lower in patients with high primary tumor coarseness (median, 21.1 mo vs. not reached, P 5 0.003; 12.6 vs. 25.8 mo, P 5 0.002; and 12.9 vs. 20.5 mo, P 5 0.016, respectively). Tumor coarseness was an independent predictor of OS on multivariable analysis. Contrast and busyness did not show significant associations with OS (P 5 0.075 and 0.059, respectively), but PFS and LPFS were longer in patients with high levels of each (for contrast: median of 20.5 vs. 12.6 mo, P 5 0.015, and median not reached vs. 24 mo, P 5 0.02; and for busyness: median of 20.5 vs. 12.6 mo, P 5 0.01, and median not reached vs. 24 mo, P 5 0.006). Neither complexity nor any of the SUV parameters showed significant associations with the survival parameters. Conclusion: In NSCLC, baseline 18 F-FDG PET scan uptake showing abnormal texture as measured by coarseness, contrast, and busyness is associated with nonresponse to chemoradiotherapy by RECIST and with poorer prognosis. Measurement of tumor metabolic heterogeneity with these parameters may provide indices that can be used to stratify patients in clinical trials for lung cancer chemoradiotherapy.

http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12112428/-/DC1.