Philipp Sorgo
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Philipp Sorgo has a total of 21 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alan E. Thong
Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
1 shared publication - Alberto Briganti
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University
1 shared publication - Ana Maria Samanes Gajate
Nuclear Medicine Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Andreas Markus Loening
Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, USA
1 shared publication - Andrei Iagaru
Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
1 shared publication - Anna Grattagliano
Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
The Challenge of External Generalisability: Insights from the Bicentric Validation of a [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET Based Radiomics Signature for Primary Prostate Cancer Characterisation Using Histopathology as Reference
Background: PSMA PET radiomics is a promising tool for primary prostate cancer (PCa) characterisation. However, small single-centre studies and lack of external validation hinder definitive conclusions on the potential of PSMA PET radiomics in the initial workup of PCa. We aimed to validate a radiomics signature in a larger internal cohort and in an external cohort from a separate centre. Methods: One hundred and twenty-seven PCa patients were retrospectively enrolled across two independent hospitals. The first centre (IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Centre 1) contributed 62 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET scans, 20 patients classified as low-grade (ISUP grade < 4), and 42 as high-grade (ISUP grade ≥ 4). The second centre (Stanford University Hospital, Centre 2) provided 65 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET scans, and 49 low-grade and 16 high-grade patients. A radiomics model previously generated in Centre 1 was tested on the two cohorts separately and afterward on the entire dataset. Then, we evaluated whether the radiomics features selected in the previous investigation could generalise to new data. Several machine learning (ML) models underwent training and testing using 100-fold Monte Carlo cross-validation, independently at both Centre 1 and Centre 2, with a 70–30% train–test split. Additionally, models were trained in one centre and tested in the other, and vice versa. Furthermore, data from both centres were combined for training and testing using Monte Carlo cross-validation. Finally, a new radiomics signature built on this bicentric dataset was proposed. Several performance metrics were computed. Results: The previously generated radiomics signature resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 80.4% when tested on Centre 1, while it generalised poorly to Centre 2, where it reached an AUC of 62.7%. When the whole cohort was considered, AUC was 72.5%. Similarly, new ML models trained on the previously selected features yielded, at best, an AUC of 80.9% for Centre 1 and performed at chance for Centre 2 (AUC of 49.3%). A new signature built on this bicentric dataset reached, at best, an average AUC of 91.4% in the test set. Conclusions: The satisfying performance of radiomics models when used in the original development settings, paired with the poor performance otherwise observed, emphasises the need to consider centre-specific factors and dataset characteristics when developing radiomics models. Combining radiomics datasets is a viable strategy to reduce such centre-specific biases, but external validation is still needed.
Open AccessThe Challenge of External Generalisability: Insights from the Bicentric Validation of a [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET Based Radiomics Signature for Primary Prostate Cancer Characterisation Using Histopathology as Reference
Background: PSMA PET radiomics is a promising tool for primary prostate cancer (PCa) characterisation. However, small single-centre studies and lack of external validation hinder definitive conclusions on the potential of PSMA PET radiomics in the initial workup of PCa. We aimed to validate a radiomics signature in a larger internal cohort and in an external cohort from a separate centre. Methods: One hundred and twenty-seven PCa patients were retrospectively enrolled across two independent hospitals. The first centre (IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Centre 1) contributed 62 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET scans, 20 patients classified as low-grade (ISUP grade < 4), and 42 as high-grade (ISUP grade ≥ 4). The second centre (Stanford University Hospital, Centre 2) provided 65 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET scans, and 49 low-grade and 16 high-grade patients. A radiomics model previously generated in Centre 1 was tested on the two cohorts separately and afterward on the entire dataset. Then, we evaluated whether the radiomics features selected in the previous investigation could generalise to new data. Several machine learning (ML) models underwent training and testing using 100-fold Monte Carlo cross-validation, independently at both Centre 1 and Centre 2, with a 70–30% train–test split. Additionally, models were trained in one centre and tested in the other, and vice versa. Furthermore, data from both centres were combined for training and testing using Monte Carlo cross-validation. Finally, a new radiomics signature built on this bicentric dataset was proposed. Several performance metrics were computed. Results: The previously generated radiomics signature resulted in an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 80.4% when tested on Centre 1, while it generalised poorly to Centre 2, where it reached an AUC of 62.7%. When the whole cohort was considered, AUC was 72.5%. Similarly, new ML models trained on the previously selected features yielded, at best, an AUC of 80.9% for Centre 1 and performed at chance for Centre 2 (AUC of 49.3%). A new signature built on this bicentric dataset reached, at best, an average AUC of 91.4% in the test set. Conclusions: The satisfying performance of radiomics models when used in the original development settings, paired with the poor performance otherwise observed, emphasises the need to consider centre-specific factors and dataset characteristics when developing radiomics models. Combining radiomics datasets is a viable strategy to reduce such centre-specific biases, but external validation is still needed.