Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Oncol. Aug 24, 2022; 13(8): 702-711
Published online Aug 24, 2022. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v13.i8.702
Published online Aug 24, 2022. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v13.i8.702
Classification | Parameter | Explanation |
Geometry variables | Area | Lesion surface area, measured in cm2 |
Maximum diameter | The longest line that joins two points on the border of the lesion, measured in cm | |
Perimeter | Total boundary length of the region of interest (i.e. lesion), measured in cm | |
Circularity | Ratio of the perimeter of the lesion divided by the perimeter of a circle with the same midpoint and same area as the lesion | |
Mean radius (Rm) | Mean value of the lesion’s radii | |
Standard deviation of Rm | Standard deviation of the mean radius | |
Coefficient of variation of Rm | Expresses the standard deviation as a percentage of the mean | |
Eccentricity | Distance between color and geometric midpoint within the lesion | |
Eccentricity ratio | Distance between midpoint and color midpoint expressed as a fraction of the maximum diameter | |
Sharpness variables | SD of gray intensity | Intensity of gray on the border of the lesion |
Coefficient of variation of SD of gray intensity | SD of gray intensity in grayscale image. The higher the value, the more discrete the lesion is from the surrounding normal skin (Manousaki et al[7], 2016) | |
Color texture variables | Grayscale lacunarity of lesion (Lac gray) | It is estimated in grayscale image and assesses image texture heterogeneity or incomplete space filling within the lesion |
Color variables | Range of gray, red, green, blue | Range of values of gray, red, green, blue intensity |
Mean gray, red, green, blue | Mean value of gray, red, green, blue intensity within the lesion | |
SD of gray, red, green, blue | Standard deviation of gray, red, green, blue intensity within the lesion | |
Coefficient of variation of gray, red, green, blue | Expresses the standard deviation of gray, red, green, blue intensity values as mean percentage | |
Skewness from Gaussian curve (gray, red, green, blue) | Deviation of each color’s histogram from the normal distribution curve |
Variable | Study group, SLNB+; n = 20 | Control group, SLNB-; n = 79 | P value | |
Demographics | ||||
Sex | ||||
Male | 12 (60%) | 40 (50%) | 0.62 | |
Female | 8 (40%) | 39 (50%) | ||
Age (yr) | 61 (13) | 68 (15) | 0.05 | |
Tumor thickness (mm) | 2.6 (2.7) | 2.2 (3.0) | 0.64 | |
Subtype | Superficial spread | 3 (15%) | 44 (56%) | 0.04 |
Nodular | 10 (50%) | 25 (32%) | ||
Secondary nodular | 7 (35%) | 10 (12%) | ||
Geometric variables | ||||
Area (cm2) | 3.4 (2.9) | 2.8 (4.7) | 0.49 | |
MaxD (cm) | 2.4 (1.2) | 2 (1.1) | 0.22 | |
Perimeter (cm) | 6.6 (3.0) | 5.7 (3.3) | 0.25 | |
Circularity (ratio) | 1.1 (0.1) | 1.1 (0.1) | 0.44 | |
Rm (cm) | 0.98 (0.5) | 0.84 (0.5) | 0.21 | |
SDRm | 0.14 (0.1) | 0.12 (0.1) | 0.48 | |
CVRm | 13 (7.1) | 13 (5.5) | 0.88 | |
Delta (cm) | 0.04 (0.03) | 0.03 (0.03) | 0.04 | |
Delta ratio | 1.8 (0.9) | 1.6 (1.3) | 0.42 | |
Sharpness variables | ||||
Sharpness | 31 (9) | 26 (8) | 0.02 | |
CV sharpness | 22 (6) | 18 (7) | 0.02 | |
Color texture variables | ||||
Lac gray | 2 (0.28) | 1.97 (0.30) | 0.65 | |
Color variables | ||||
Mean gray | 104 (21) | 113 (24) | 0.12 | |
SD gray | 32 (6) | 30 (7) | 0.12 | |
CV gray | 8 (2) | 10 (1) | 0.07 | |
Range gray | 201 (21) | 187 (32) | 0.03 | |
Skewness gray | 0.52 (0.5) | 0.23 (0.6) | 0.03 | |
Mean red | 144 (26) | 157 (32) | 0.06 | |
SD red | 37 (9) | 33 (11) | 0.14 | |
CV red | 27 (10) | 23 (11) | 0.14 | |
Range red | 205 (23) | 190 (37) | 0.04 | |
Skewness red | 0.03 (0.43) | -0.04 (0.83) | 0.003 | |
Mean green | 89 (23) | 96 (23) | 0.24 | |
SD green | 33 (7) | 31 (6) | 0.19 | |
CV green | 39 (12) | 35 (13) | 0.13 | |
Range green | 209 (24) | 195 (33) | 0.04 | |
Skewness green | 0.64 (0.46) | 0.41 (0.60) | 0.08 | |
Mean blue | 87 (22) | 94 (25) | 0.22 | |
SD blue | 33 (7) | 31 (6) | 0.24 | |
CV blue | 40 (10) | 35 (13) | 0.14 | |
Range blue | 218 (23) | 201 (34) | 0.02 | |
Skewness blue | 0.67 (0.47) | 0.42 (0.56) | 0.05 |
Variable | Coefficient (β) | Standard Error | Wald χ2 | P value | Odds ratio | 95%CI |
Age | -0.05 | 0.20 | 7.60 | 0.006 | 0.95 | 0.91 to 0.99 |
Subtype, nevus-associated | 2.65 | 1.28 | 4.28 | 0.038 | 14.19 | 1.15 to 174.76 |
Subtype, nodular | 2.37 | 1.01 | 5.51 | 0.019 | 10.71 | 1.48 to 77.48 |
Subtype, secondary nodular | 2.90 | 1.08 | 7.22 | 0.007 | 18.21 | 2.19 to 151.22 |
Eccentricity | 0.38 | 0.13 | 7.84 | 0.005 | 1.46 | 1.12 to 1.89 |
- Citation: Papadakis M, Paschos A, Papazoglou AS, Manios A, Zirngibl H, Manios G, Koumaki D. Computer-aided clinical image analysis as a predictor of sentinel lymph node positivity in cutaneous melanoma. World J Clin Oncol 2022; 13(8): 702-711
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v13/i8/702.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5306/wjco.v13.i8.702