Capturing COPD heterogeneity: anomaly detection and parametric response mapping comparison for phenotyping on chest computed tomography
Authors: Almeida Silvia D. , Norajitra Tobias , Lüth Carsten T. , Wald Tassilo , Weru Vivienn , Nolden Marco , Jäger Paul F. , von Stackelberg Oyunbileg , Heußel Claus Peter , Weinheimer Oliver , Biederer Jürgen , Kauczor Hans-Ulrich , Maier-Hein Klaus 
Published: March 2024

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a substantial global health burden, demanding advanced diagnostic tools for early detection and accurate phenotyping. In this line, this study seeks to enhance COPD characterization on chest computed tomography (CT) by comparing the spatial and quantitative relationships between traditional parametric response mapping (PRM) and a novel self-supervised anomaly detection approach, and to unveil potential additional insights into the dynamic transitional stages of COPD.

Methods

Non-contrast inspiratory and expiratory CT of 1,310 never-smoker and GOLD 0 individuals and COPD patients (GOLD 1–4) from the COPDGene dataset were retrospectively evaluated. A novel self-supervised anomaly detection approach was applied to quantify lung abnormalities associated with COPD, as regional deviations. These regional anomaly scores were qualitatively and quantitatively compared, per GOLD class, to PRM volumes (emphysema: PRMEmph, functional small-airway disease: PRMfSAD) and to a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Clustering, applied on the self-supervised latent space. Its relationships to pulmonary function tests (PFTs) were also evaluated.

Results

Initial t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) visualization of the self-supervised latent space highlighted distinct spatial patterns, revealing clear separations between regions with and without emphysema and air trapping. Four stable clusters were identified among this latent space by the PCA and Cluster Analysis. As the GOLD stage increased, PRMEmph, PRMfSAD, anomaly score, and Cluster 3 volumes exhibited escalating trends, contrasting with a decline in Cluster 2. The patient-wise anomaly scores significantly differed across GOLD stages (p &lt; 0.01), except for never-smokers and GOLD 0 patients. In contrast, PRMEmph, PRMfSAD, and cluster classes showed fewer significant differences. Pearson correlation coefficients revealed moderate anomaly score correlations to PFTs (0.41–0.68), except for the functional residual capacity and smoking duration. The anomaly score was correlated with PRMEmph (r = 0.66, p &lt; 0.01) and PRMfSAD (r = 0.61, p &lt; 0.01). Anomaly scores significantly improved fitting of PRM-adjusted multivariate models for predicting clinical parameters (p &lt; 0.001). Bland–Altman plots revealed that volume agreement between PRM-derived volumes and clusters was not constant across the range of measurements.

Conclusion

Our study highlights the synergistic utility of the anomaly detection approach and traditional PRM in capturing the nuanced heterogeneity of COPD. The observed disparities in spatial patterns, cluster dynamics, and correlations with PFTs underscore the distinct – yet complementary – strengths of these methods. Integrating anomaly detection and PRM offers a promising avenue for understanding of COPD pathophysiology, potentially informing more tailored diagnostic and intervention approaches to improve patient outcomes.