Survival Prediction and Treatment Decisions in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Deep Learning-Based Radiomics Approach
Xiaoqin Wei1, Jun Xiao1, Ying Liu2
1School of Medical Imaging, North Sichuan Medical College, 637000 Nanchong, Sichuan, China.
Aims/Background:
Deep learning radiomics (DLRadiomics) can capture a wide range of tumor and lesion characteristics, providing valuable insights into biological behavior, pathophysiological status, and patient prognosis. This study integrated clinical data with deep learning-derived features into a machine learning survival model to assess the effectiveness of hepatectomy and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients.
Methods:
This study included pathologically confirmed HCC patients who received either hepatectomy or TACE between January 2013 and December 2022. We utilized three deep learning-based algorithms (ResNet50, ResNet18, and DenseNet121) with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) images to predict the overall survival time. Deep learning features were extracted from these predictive models. Furthermore, a combined survival model was developed by incorporating clinical factors with the deep learning features for two treatment regimens separately. The areas under the curves (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the discrimination of the model at different time points. Additionally, nomograms were constructed to predict patient prognosis undergoing different treatment regimens, and their survival risk was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis.
Results:
This study recruited 409 HCC patients who received either hepatectomy (n = 278, 57 [49-66]; 239 men) or TACE (n = 131, 62 [51-69.5]; 111 men). ResNet50 achieved the highest AUC of 0.866 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.815-0.917) in the training set and 0.793 (95% CI: 0.675-0.912) in the testing cohort. Overall, six models were constructed to assess overall survival for hepatectomy and TACE treatments, with the combined models exhibiting superior discriminative performance. The C-index for the combined hepatectomy model was 0.836 (95% CI: 0.776-0.897) in the training cohort and 0.861 (95% CI: 0.755-0.967) in the testing cohort. The C-index for the combined TACE model was 0.840 (95% CI: 0.792-0.888) in the training cohort and 0.834 (95% CI: 0.759-0.910) in the testing cohort. Two nomograms were created to help clinicians in selecting a treatment method by examining the difference scores between treatments.
Conclusion:
The machine learning models can potentially predict differences in outcomes between hepatectomy and TACE. Furthermore, prognostic models using deep learning-based features can effectively predict survival risk in HCC patients.
More Related Videos
07:13Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
Published on: April 18, 2025
05:06A "Patient-Like" Orthotopic Syngeneic Mouse Model of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Metastasis
Published on: October 24, 2015
Related Concept Videos
Predicting Molecular Geometry
Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
Survival Curves
The Kaplan-Meier estimator is the most common method for constructing survival curves. This...
Survival Tree
Building a Survival Tree
Constructing a...
Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
Prediction Intervals
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y.
