基于CT影像组学模型鉴别诊断甲状腺 良恶性结节的研究
Research on the Differential Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules Based on CT Radiomics Models
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2026.162734, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 王芳芳, 秦文恒, 李 志, 赵鲁平:济宁医学院附属医院医学影像科,山东 济宁;张丽娟, 毛 森, 侯曼曼*:济宁医学院附属医院超声医学科,山东 济宁
关键词: 影像组学甲状腺结节CT鉴别诊断Radiomics Thyroid Nodules CT Differential Diagnosis
摘要: 目的:探讨CT影像组学模型对良恶性甲状腺结节的鉴别诊断价值。方法:回顾性分析经手术病理学证实279例甲状腺结节患者,其中甲状腺恶性结节133例,良性结节146例。将患者按照8:2的比例随机分为训练集223例和测试集56例。采用联影URP组学软件基于术前平扫期、动脉期、静脉期CT图像提取影像组学特征,后经过特征筛选,得到影像组学评分(Radscore),并建立影像组学随机森林、逻辑回归、支持向量机模型。采用ROC曲线下面积(Area under the curve, AUC)评估3种模型的诊断效能;通过校准曲线和决策曲线(DCA)评估3种模型的预测效能和临床应用价值。结果:随机森林模型训练集和测试集的曲线下面积(Area under the curve, AUC)分别为0.849 [95%可信区间(CI):0.798~0.900]和0.788 (95% CI:0.665~0.911),灵敏度、特异度、准确率分别为85.8%、75.9%、79.6%和70.4%、73.9%、73.2%。逻辑回归模型训练集和测试集的AUC分别为0.817 (95% CI: 0.762~0.872)和0.803 (95% CI: 0.683~0.923),灵敏度、特异度、准确率分别为77.8%、72.2%、75.0%和74.5%、72.2%、73.3%。支持向量机模型训练集和测试集的AUC分别为0.817 (95% CI: 0.760~0.873)和0.808 (95% CI: 0.700~0.920),灵敏度、特异度、准确率分别为82.1%、73.9%、77.8%和77.8%、69.5%、71.4%。逻辑回归、随机森林、支持向量机三组模型的AUC两两比较的Delong检验结果分别为0.593 (随机森林–支持向量机)、0.751 (随机森林–逻辑回归)、0.831 (支持向量机–逻辑回归),提示三组模型在诊断效能上表现相近;校准曲线分析结果显示,训练集(随机森林、逻辑回归、支持向量机) Brier Score分别为0.162、0.173、0.172;测试集(随机森林、逻辑回归、支持向量机) Brier Score分别为0.186、0.183、0.179,提示三组模型的预测效能均表现良好;临床决策曲线分析提示三组模型的临床净收益显示良好。结论:CT影像组学鉴别甲状腺良恶性结节具有较高的诊断效能、较好的预测效能,且本研究影像组学模型稳定性良好。
Abstract: Objective: To investigate the diagnostic value of a CT-based radiomics model in differentiating benign from malignant thyroid nodules. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 279 patients with thyroid nodules confirmed by surgical pathology, including 133 cases of malignant thyroid nodules and 146 cases of benign nodules. The patients were randomly divided into a training set (223 cases) and a test set (56 cases) in an 8:2 ratio. Using United Imaging’s URP radiomics software, radiomic features were extracted from preoperative non-contrast, arterial phase, and venous phase CT images. After feature selection, a radiomics score (Radscore) was obtained, and three models—random forest, logistic regression, and support vector machine—were established based on radiomic features. The diagnostic performance of the three models was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The predictive performance and clinical application value of the three models were assessed through calibration curves and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: The random forest model achieved area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.849 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.798~0.900] and 0.788 (95% CI: 0.665~0.911) for the training and test sets, respectively. Its sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 85.8%, 75.9%, and 79.6% for the training set, and 70.4%, 73.9%, and 73.2% for the test set, respectively. The logistic regression model achieved AUC values of 0.817 (95% CI: 0.762~0.872) and 0.803 (95% CI: 0.683~0.923) for the training and test sets, respectively. Its sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 77.8%, 72.2%, and 75.0% for the training set, and 74.5%, 72.2%, and 73.3% for the test set, respectively. The support vector machine model achieved AUC values of 0.817 (95% CI: 0.760~0.873) and 0.808 (95% CI: 0.700~0.920) for the training and test sets, respectively. Its sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 82.1%, 73.9%, and 77.8% for the training set, and 77.8%, 69.5%, and 71.4% for the test set, respectively. Delong’s test results for pairwise comparisons of the AUCs among the logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machine models were 0.593 (random forest vs. support vector machine), 0.751 (random forest vs. logistic regression), and 0.831 (support vector machine vs. logistic regression), indicating similar diagnostic performance among the three models. Calibration curve analysis revealed Brier scores of 0.162, 0.173, and 0.172 for the training set (random forest, logistic regression, and support vector machine, respectively), and 0.186, 0.183, and 0.179 for the test set (random forest, logistic regression, and support vector machine, respectively), suggesting good predictive performance for all three models. Decision curve analysis indicated favorable clinical net benefits for all three models. Conclusion: CT radiomics demonstrates high diagnostic efficacy and good predictive performance in differentiating benign and malignant thyroid nodules, and the radiomics models in this study exhibit excellent stability.
文章引用:王芳芳, 秦文恒, 李志, 张丽娟, 赵鲁平, 毛森, 侯曼曼. 基于CT影像组学模型鉴别诊断甲状腺 良恶性结节的研究[J]. 临床医学进展, 2026, 16(2): 3216-3224. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2026.162734

参考文献

[1] 王芳芳, 徐景景, 赵鲁平, 等. 基于CT影像特征的列线图对甲状腺良恶性结节鉴别诊断的价值[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2023, 42(10): 1561-1566.
[2] Khatami, F. and Tavangar, S.M. (2018) A Review of Driver Genetic Alterations in Thyroid Cancers. Iranian Journal of Pathology, 13, 125-135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] Lambin, P., Rios-Velazquez, E., Leijenaar, R., Carvalho, S., van Stiphout, R.G.P.M., Granton, P., et al. (2012) Radiomics: Extracting More Information from Medical Images Using Advanced Feature Analysis. European Journal of Cancer, 48, 441-446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] 曹娜, 黄渤琪, 刘志民, 等. 基于CT影像组学构建富血供超小肾癌与乏脂肪血管平滑肌脂肪瘤鉴别诊断的简易预测模型[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2023, 27(10): 6-11.
[5] 侯慧, 朱银杏, 王太宇, 等. 基于双参数MRI影像组学构建的支持向量机模型对乳腺癌人表皮生长因子受体-2和激素受体表达的预测效能[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2024, 28(4): 7-13.
[6] 韦启君, 林盛才, 黄福灵, 等. 双能CT影像组学在甲状腺结节定性诊断中的价值研究[J]. 中国医疗设备, 2022, 37(12): 87-90.
[7] 王玉春, 杨斌, 黄鹏飞, 等. ACR TI-RADS与基于人工智能的报告系统对甲状腺结节的诊断效能及减少不必要穿刺能力的比较[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2021, 30(5): 408-413.
[8] 孔丹, 张建东, 单文莉, 等. CT影像组学模型对甲状腺良恶性结节的鉴别价值[J]. 中华放射学杂志, 2020, 54(3): 187-191.
[9] 陈鹏, 张成孟, 周艳艳, 等. 增强CT影像组学在鉴别TI-RADS 4A、4B类甲状腺微小结节良恶性的价值[J]. 中国CT和MRI杂志, 2024, 22(7): 39-42.
[10] 董林娟, 资欣月, 李庆文, 等. 基于CT影像组学列线图鉴别甲状腺乳头状癌与结节性甲状腺肿的价值[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2023, 42(9): 1409-1416.
[11] Xu, H., Wang, X., Guan, C., Tan, R., Yang, Q., Zhang, Q., et al. (2022) Value of Whole-Thyroid CT-Based Radiomics in Predicting Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules. Frontiers in Oncology, 12, Article ID: 828259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] 赵泓博, 叶靖, 段绍峰, 等. CT影像组学对甲状腺乳头状癌与腺瘤的鉴别[J]. 中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2021, 27(2): 102-106.
[13] 吴宇强, 靳激扬, 冯银波. 甲状腺意外结节增强CT的纹理特征分析对良恶性鉴别的价值研究[J]. 东南大学学报: 医学版, 2016, 35(1): 112-116.
[14] 郭炜, 罗德红, 赵燕风, 等. CT纹理分析技术鉴别甲状腺良恶性结节可行性研究[J]. 国际医学放射学杂志, 2017, 40(1): 3-5+36.
[15] 秦文恒, 刘慧君, 于昊, 等. 基于CT增强扫描静脉期的影像组学列线图预测晚期肺腺癌患者对培美曲塞+铂类化疗敏感性的价值[J]. 中国中西医结合影像学杂志, 2023, 21(5): 481-486.