1
|
Boss MA, Malyarenko D, Partridge S, Obuchowski N, Shukla-Dave A, Winfield JM, Fuller CD, Miller K, Mishra V, Ohliger M, Wilmes LJ, Attariwala R, Andrews T, deSouza NM, Margolis DJ, Chenevert TL. The QIBA Profile for Diffusion-Weighted MRI: Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker. Radiology 2024; 313:e233055. [PMID: 39377680 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.233055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/09/2024]
Abstract
The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) provides a quantitative measure of water mobility that can be used to probe alterations in tissue microstructure due to disease or treatment. Establishment of the accepted level of variance in ADC measurements for each clinical application is critical for its successful implementation. The Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Biomarker Committee of the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) has recently advanced the ADC Profile from the consensus to clinically feasible stage for the brain, liver, prostate, and breast. This profile distills multiple studies on ADC repeatability and describes detailed procedures to achieve stated performance claims on an observed ADC change within acceptable confidence limits. In addition to reviewing the current ADC Profile claims, this report has used recent literature to develop proposed updates for establishing metrology benchmarks for mean lesion ADC change that account for measurement variance. Specifically, changes in mean ADC exceeding 8% for brain lesions, 27% for liver lesions, 27% for prostate lesions, and 15% for breast lesions are claimed to represent true changes with 95% confidence. This report also discusses the development of the ADC Profile, highlighting its various stages, and describes the workflow essential to achieving a standardized implementation of advanced quantitative diffusion-weighted MRI in the clinic. The presented QIBA ADC Profile guidelines should enable successful clinical application of ADC as a quantitative imaging biomarker and ensure reproducible ADC measurements that can be used to confidently evaluate longitudinal changes and treatment response for individual patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael A Boss
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Dariya Malyarenko
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Savannah Partridge
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Nancy Obuchowski
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Amita Shukla-Dave
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Jessica M Winfield
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Clifton D Fuller
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Kevin Miller
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Virendra Mishra
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Michael Ohliger
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Lisa J Wilmes
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Raj Attariwala
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Trevor Andrews
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Daniel J Margolis
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| | - Thomas L Chenevert
- From the Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, 50 S 16th St, Philadelphia, PA 19102 (M.A.B.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (D.M., T.L.C.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash (S.P.); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.O.); Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.S.D.); The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK (J.M.W., N.M.d.S.); Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (C.D.F.); CaliberMRI, Boulder, Colo (K.M.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (V.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.O., L.J.W.); Aim Medical Imaging, Vancouver, Canada (R.A.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (T.A.); and Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY (D.J.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Keenan KE, Jordanova KV, Ogier SE, Tamada D, Bruhwiler N, Starekova J, Riek J, McCracken PJ, Hernando D. Phantoms for Quantitative Body MRI: a review and discussion of the phantom value. MAGMA (NEW YORK, N.Y.) 2024; 37:535-549. [PMID: 38896407 PMCID: PMC11417080 DOI: 10.1007/s10334-024-01181-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2023] [Revised: 05/18/2024] [Accepted: 06/11/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024]
Abstract
In this paper, we review the value of phantoms for body MRI in the context of their uses for quantitative MRI methods research, clinical trials, and clinical imaging. Certain uses of phantoms are common throughout the body MRI community, including measuring bias, assessing reproducibility, and training. In addition to these uses, phantoms in body MRI methods research are used for novel methods development and the design of motion compensation and mitigation techniques. For clinical trials, phantoms are an essential part of quality management strategies, facilitating the conduct of ethically sound, reliable, and regulatorily compliant clinical research of both novel MRI methods and therapeutic agents. In the clinic, phantoms are used for development of protocols, mitigation of cost, quality control, and radiotherapy. We briefly review phantoms developed for quantitative body MRI, and finally, we review open questions regarding the most effective use of a phantom for body MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn E Keenan
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO, 80305, USA.
| | - Kalina V Jordanova
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO, 80305, USA
| | - Stephen E Ogier
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO, 80305, USA
- Department of Physics, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
| | | | - Natalie Bruhwiler
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO, 80305, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Krauss W, Frey J, Heydorn Lagerlöf J, Lidén M, Thunberg P. Radiomics from multisite MRI and clinical data to predict clinically significant prostate cancer. Acta Radiol 2024; 65:307-317. [PMID: 38115809 DOI: 10.1177/02841851231216555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is useful in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). MRI-derived radiomics may support the diagnosis of csPCa. PURPOSE To investigate whether adding radiomics from biparametric MRI to predictive models based on clinical and MRI parameters improves the prediction of csPCa in a multisite-multivendor setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS Clinical information (PSA, PSA density, prostate volume, and age), MRI reviews (PI-RADS 2.1), and radiomics (histogram and texture features) were retrieved from prospectively included patients examined at different radiology departments and with different MRI systems, followed by MRI-ultrasound fusion guided biopsies of lesions PI-RADS 3-5. Predictive logistic regression models of csPCa (Gleason score ≥7) for the peripheral (PZ) and transition zone (TZ), including clinical data and PI-RADS only, and combined with radiomics, were built and compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS In total, 456 lesions in 350 patients were analyzed. In PZ and TZ, PI-RADS 4-5 and PSA density, and age in PZ, were independent predictors of csPCa in models without radiomics. In models including radiomics, PI-RADS 4-5, PSA density, age, and ADC energy were independent predictors in PZ, and PI-RADS 5, PSA density and ADC mean in TZ. Comparison of areas under the ROC curve (AUC) for the models without radiomics (PZ: AUC = 0.82, TZ: AUC = 0.80) versus with radiomics (PZ: AUC = 0.82, TZ: AUC = 0.82) showed no significant differences (PZ: P = 0.366; TZ: P = 0.171). CONCLUSION PSA density and PI-RADS are potent predictors of csPCa. Radiomics do not add significant information to our multisite-multivendor dataset.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wolfgang Krauss
- Department of Radiology and Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Janusz Frey
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Jakob Heydorn Lagerlöf
- School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
- Department of Medical Physics, Karlstad Central Hospital, Sweden
| | - Mats Lidén
- Department of Radiology and Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Per Thunberg
- Department of Radiology and Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hyer DE, Caster J, Smith B, St-Aubin J, Snyder J, Shepard A, Zhang H, Mullan S, Geoghegan T, George B, Byrne J, Smith M, Buatti JM, Sonka M. A Technique to Enable Efficient Adaptive Radiation Therapy: Automated Contouring of Prostate and Adjacent Organs. Adv Radiat Oncol 2024; 9:101336. [PMID: 38260219 PMCID: PMC10801646 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2023.101336] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2022] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this work was to investigate the use of a segmentation approach that could potentially improve the speed and reproducibility of contouring during magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiation therapy. Methods and Materials The segmentation algorithm was based on a hybrid deep neural network and graph optimization approach that also allows rapid user intervention (Deep layered optimal graph image segmentation of multiple objects and surfaces [LOGISMOS] + just enough interaction [JEI]). A total of 115 magnetic resonance-data sets were used for training and quantitative assessment. Expert segmentations were used as the independent standard for the prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder, rectum, and femoral heads for all 115 data sets. In addition, 3 independent radiation oncologists contoured the prostate, seminal vesicles, and rectum for a subset of patients such that the interobserver variability could be quantified. Consensus contours were then generated from these independent contours using a simultaneous truth and performance level estimation approach, and the deviation of Deep LOGISMOS + JEI contours to the consensus contours was evaluated and compared with the interobserver variability. Results The absolute accuracy of Deep LOGISMOS + JEI generated contours was evaluated using median absolute surface-to-surface distance which ranged from a minimum of 0.20 mm for the bladder to a maximum of 0.93 mm for the prostate compared with the independent standard across all data sets. The median relative surface-to-surface distance was less than 0.17 mm for all organs, indicating that the Deep LOGISMOS + JEI algorithm did not exhibit a systematic under- or oversegmentation. Interobserver variability testing yielded a mean absolute surface-to-surface distance of 0.93, 1.04, and 0.81 mm for the prostate, seminal vesicles, and rectum, respectively. In comparison, the deviation of Deep LOGISMOS + JEI from consensus simultaneous truth and performance level estimation contours was 0.57, 0.64, and 0.55 mm for the same organs. On average, the Deep LOGISMOS algorithm took less than 26 seconds for contour segmentation. Conclusions Deep LOGISMOS + JEI segmentation efficiently generated clinically acceptable prostate and normal tissue contours, potentially limiting the need for time intensive manual contouring with each fraction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel E. Hyer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Joseph Caster
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Blake Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Joel St-Aubin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Jeffrey Snyder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Andrew Shepard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Honghai Zhang
- Iowa Institute for Biomedical Imaging, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Sean Mullan
- Iowa Institute for Biomedical Imaging, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Theodore Geoghegan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Benjamin George
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - James Byrne
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Mark Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - John M. Buatti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
| | - Milan Sonka
- Iowa Institute for Biomedical Imaging, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fennessy FM, Maier SE. Quantitative diffusion MRI in prostate cancer: Image quality, what we can measure and how it improves clinical assessment. Eur J Radiol 2023; 167:111066. [PMID: 37651828 PMCID: PMC10623580 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2023] [Revised: 08/19/2023] [Accepted: 08/24/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023]
Abstract
Diffusion-weighted imaging is a dependable method for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. In prostate tissue, there are several compartments that can be distinguished from each other, based on different water diffusion decay signals observed. Alterations in cell architecture, such as a relative increase in tumor infiltration and decrease in stroma, will influence the observed diffusion signal in a voxel due to impeded random motion of water molecules. The amount of restricted diffusion can be assessed quantitatively by measuring the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value. This is traditionally calculated using a monoexponential decay formula represented by the slope of a line produced between the logarithm of signal intensity decay plotted against selected b-values. However, the choice and number of b-values and their distribution, has a significant effect on the measured ADC values. There have been many models that attempt to use higher-order functions to better describe the observed diffusion signal decay, requiring an increased number and range of b-values. While ADC can probe heterogeneity on a macroscopic level, there is a need to optimize advanced diffusion techniques to better interrogate prostate tissue microstructure. This could be of benefit in clinical challenges such as identifying sparse tumors in normal prostate tissue or better defining tumor margins. This paper reviews the principles of diffusion MRI and novel higher order diffusion signal analysis techniques to improve the detection of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona M Fennessy
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
| | - Stephan E Maier
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States; Department of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Zhang KS, Neelsen CJO, Wennmann M, Glemser PA, Hielscher T, Weru V, Görtz M, Schütz V, Stenzinger A, Hohenfellner M, Schlemmer HP, Bonekamp D. Same-day repeatability and Between-Sequence reproducibility of Mean ADC in PI-RADS lesions. Eur J Radiol 2023; 165:110898. [PMID: 37331287 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110898] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Revised: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 05/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to assess repeatability after repositioning (inter-scan), intra-rater, inter-rater and inter-sequence variability of mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements in MRI-detected prostate lesions. METHOD Forty-three patients with suspicion for prostate cancer were included and received a clinical prostate bi-/multiparametric MRI examination with repeat scans of the T2-weighted and two DWI-weighted sequences (ssEPI and rsEPI). Two raters (R1 and R2) performed single-slice, 2D regions of interest (2D-ROIs) and 3D-segmentation-ROIs (3D-ROIs). Mean bias, corresponding limits of agreement (LoA), mean absolute difference, within-subject coefficient of variation (CoV) and repeatability/reproducibility coefficient (RC/RDC) were calculated. Bradley & Blackwood test was used for variance comparison. Linear mixed models (LMM) were used to account for multiple lesions per patient. RESULTS Inter-scan repeatability, intra-rater and inter-sequence reproducibility analysis of ADC showed no significant bias. 3D-ROIs demonstrated significantly less variability than 2D-ROIs (p < 0.01). Inter-rater comparison demonstrated small significant systematic bias of 57 × 10-6 mm2/s for 3D-ROIs (p < 0.001). Intra-rater RC, with the lowest variation, was 145 and 189 × 10-6 mm2/s for 3D- and 2D-ROIs, respectively. For 3D-ROIs of ssEPI, RCs and RDCs were 190-198 × 10-6 mm2/s for inter-scan, inter-rater and inter-sequence variation. No significant differences were found for inter-scan, inter-rater and inter-sequence variability. CONCLUSIONS In a single-scanner setting, single-slice ADC measurements showed considerable variation, which may be lowered using 3D-ROIs. For 3D-ROIs, we propose a cut-off of ∼ 200 × 10-6 mm2/s for differences introduced by repositioning, rater or sequence effects. The results suggest that follow-up measurements should be possible by different raters or sequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Sun Zhang
- Division of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Markus Wennmann
- Division of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Thomas Hielscher
- Division of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Vivienn Weru
- Division of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Magdalena Görtz
- Department of Urology, University of Heidelberg Medical Center, Heidelberg, Germany; Junior clinical cooperation unit 'Multiparametric Methods for Early Detection of Prostate Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Viktoria Schütz
- Department of Urology, University of Heidelberg Medical Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Albrecht Stenzinger
- Institute of Pathology, University of Heidelberg Medical Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Markus Hohenfellner
- Department of Urology, University of Heidelberg Medical Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Heinz-Peter Schlemmer
- Division of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Germany
| | - David Bonekamp
- Division of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Germany; Heidelberg University Medical School, Heidelberg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Thulasi Seetha S, Garanzini E, Tenconi C, Marenghi C, Avuzzi B, Catanzaro M, Stagni S, Villa S, Chiorda BN, Badenchini F, Bertocchi E, Sanduleanu S, Pignoli E, Procopio G, Valdagni R, Rancati T, Nicolai N, Messina A. Stability of Multi-Parametric Prostate MRI Radiomic Features to Variations in Segmentation. J Pers Med 2023; 13:1172. [PMID: 37511785 PMCID: PMC10381192 DOI: 10.3390/jpm13071172] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Revised: 07/13/2023] [Accepted: 07/18/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Stability analysis remains a fundamental step in developing a successful imaging biomarker to personalize oncological strategies. This study proposes an in silico contour generation method for simulating segmentation variations to identify stable radiomic features. Ground-truth annotation provided for the whole prostate gland on the multi-parametric MRI sequences (T2w, ADC, and SUB-DCE) were perturbed to mimic segmentation differences observed among human annotators. In total, we generated 15 synthetic contours for a given image-segmentation pair. One thousand two hundred twenty-four unfiltered/filtered radiomic features were extracted applying Pyradiomics, followed by stability assessment using ICC(1,1). Stable features identified in the internal population were then compared with an external population to discover and report robust features. Finally, we also investigated the impact of a wide range of filtering strategies on the stability of features. The percentage of unfiltered (filtered) features that remained robust subjected to segmentation variations were T2w-36% (81%), ADC-36% (94%), and SUB-43% (93%). Our findings suggest that segmentation variations can significantly impact radiomic feature stability but can be mitigated by including pre-filtering strategies as part of the feature extraction pipeline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sithin Thulasi Seetha
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (S.T.S.); (R.V.)
- Department of Precision Medicine, GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6211 LK Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Enrico Garanzini
- Department of Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (E.G.); (A.M.)
| | - Chiara Tenconi
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy;
- Department of Oncology and Hematooncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy
| | - Cristina Marenghi
- Unit of Genito-Urinary Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (C.M.); (F.B.); (E.B.); (G.P.)
| | - Barbara Avuzzi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (B.A.); (S.V.); (B.N.C.)
| | - Mario Catanzaro
- Department of Urology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (M.C.); (S.S.); (N.N.)
| | - Silvia Stagni
- Department of Urology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (M.C.); (S.S.); (N.N.)
| | - Sergio Villa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (B.A.); (S.V.); (B.N.C.)
| | - Barbara Noris Chiorda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (B.A.); (S.V.); (B.N.C.)
| | - Fabio Badenchini
- Unit of Genito-Urinary Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (C.M.); (F.B.); (E.B.); (G.P.)
| | - Elena Bertocchi
- Unit of Genito-Urinary Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (C.M.); (F.B.); (E.B.); (G.P.)
| | - Sebastian Sanduleanu
- Department of Precision Medicine, GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6211 LK Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Emanuele Pignoli
- Department of Medical Physics, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy;
| | - Giuseppe Procopio
- Unit of Genito-Urinary Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (C.M.); (F.B.); (E.B.); (G.P.)
| | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Prostate Cancer Program, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (S.T.S.); (R.V.)
- Department of Oncology and Hematooncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Data Science Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy
| | - Nicola Nicolai
- Department of Urology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (M.C.); (S.S.); (N.N.)
| | - Antonella Messina
- Department of Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; (E.G.); (A.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Yang L, Li XM, Zhang MN, Yao J, Song B. Nomogram Models for Distinguishing Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate From Prostatic Acinar Adenocarcinoma Based on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Korean J Radiol 2023; 24:668-680. [PMID: 37404109 DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2022.1022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2022] [Revised: 04/29/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 07/06/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) with those of prostatic acinar adenocarcinoma (PAC) and develop prediction models to distinguish IDC-P from PAC and IDC-P with a high proportion (IDC ≥ 10%, hpIDC-P) from IDC-P with a low proportion (IDC < 10%, lpIDC-P) and PAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred and six patients with hpIDC-P, 105 with lpIDC-P and 168 with PAC, who underwent pretreatment multiparametric MRI between January 2015 and December 2020 were included in this study. Imaging parameters, including invasiveness and metastasis, were evaluated and compared between the PAC and IDC-P groups as well as between the hpIDC-P and lpIDC-P subgroups. Nomograms for distinguishing IDC-P from PAC, and hpIDC-P from lpIDC-P and PAC, were made using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The discrimination performance of the models was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC-AUC) in the sample, where the models were derived from without an independent validation sample. RESULTS The tumor diameter was larger and invasive and metastatic features were more common in the IDC-P than in the PAC group (P < 0.001). The distribution of extraprostatic extension (EPE) and pelvic lymphadenopathy was even greater, and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratio was lower in the hpIDC-P than in the lpIDC-P group (P < 0.05). The ROC-AUCs of the stepwise models based solely on imaging features for distinguishing IDC-P from PAC and hpIDC-P from lpIDC-P and PAC were 0.797 (95% confidence interval, 0.750-0.843) and 0.777 (0.727-0.827), respectively. CONCLUSION IDC-P was more likely to be larger, more invasive, and more metastatic, with obviously restricted diffusion. EPE, pelvic lymphadenopathy, and a lower ADC ratio were more likely to occur in hpIDC-P, and were also the most useful variables in both nomograms for predicting IDC-P and hpIDC-P.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ling Yang
- Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, China
| | - Xue-Ming Li
- Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, China
| | - Meng-Ni Zhang
- Department of Pathology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, China
| | - Jin Yao
- Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, China.
| | - Bin Song
- Department of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Sichuan, China.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Camacho A, Salah F, Bay CP, Waring J, Umeton R, Hirsch MS, Cole AP, Kibel AS, Loda M, Tempany CM, Fennessy FM. PI-RADS 3 score: A retrospective experience of clinically significant prostate cancer detection. BJUI COMPASS 2023; 4:473-481. [PMID: 37334024 PMCID: PMC10268585 DOI: 10.1002/bco2.231] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Revised: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 02/20/2023] [Indexed: 06/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Rationale and objectives The study aims to propose an optimal workflow in patients with a PI-RADS 3 (PR-3) assessment category (AC) through determining the timing and type of pathology interrogation used for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in these men based upon a 5-year retrospective review in a large academic medical center. Materials and methods This United States Health Insurance Probability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective study included men without prior csPCa diagnosis who received PR-3 AC on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (MRI). Subsequent incidence and time to csPCa diagnosis and number/type of prostate interventions was recorded. Categorical data were compared using Fisher's exact test and continuous data using ANOVA omnibus F-test. Results Our cohort of 3238 men identified 332 who received PR-3 as their highest AC on MRI, 240 (72.3%) of whom had pathology follow-up within 5 years. csPCa was detected in 76/240 (32%) and non-csPCa in 109/240 (45%) within 9.0 ± 10.6 months. Using a non-targeted trans-rectal ultrasound biopsy as the initial approach (n = 55), another diagnostic procedure was required to diagnose csPCa in 42/55 (76.4%) of men, compared with 3/21(14.3%) men with an initial MR targeted-biopsy approach (n = 21); (p < 0.0001). Those with csPCa had higher median serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PSA density, and lower median prostate volume (p < 0.003) compared with non-csPCa/no PCa. Conclusion Most patients with PR-3 AC underwent prostate pathology exams within 5 years, 32% of whom were found to have csPCa within 1 year of MRI, most often with a higher PSA density and a prior non-csPCa diagnosis. Addition of a targeted biopsy approach initially reduced the need for a second biopsy to reach a for csPCa diagnosis. Thus, a combination of systematic and targeted biopsy is advised in men with PR-3 and a co-existing abnormal PSA and PSA density.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrés Camacho
- Department of RadiologyBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Fatima Salah
- Department of RadiologyBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Camden P. Bay
- Department of RadiologyBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Jonathan Waring
- Department of Informatics and Analytics, Dana‐Farber Cancer InstituteHarvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Renato Umeton
- Department of Informatics and Analytics, Dana‐Farber Cancer InstituteHarvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Michelle S. Hirsch
- Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's HospitalHarvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Alexander P. Cole
- Department of Urology, Brigham and Women's HospitalHarvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Adam S. Kibel
- Department of Urology, Brigham and Women's HospitalHarvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Massimo Loda
- Department of Pathology, Weill Cornell MedicineNew York‐Presbyterian HospitalNew YorkNew YorkUSA
| | - Clare M. Tempany
- Department of RadiologyBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Fiona M. Fennessy
- Department of RadiologyBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonMassachusettsUSA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Li L, Shiradkar R, Tirumani SH, Bittencourt LK, Fu P, Mahran A, Buzzy C, Stricker PD, Rastinehad AR, Magi-Galluzzi C, Ponsky L, Klein E, Purysko AS, Madabhushi A. Novel radiomic analysis on bi-parametric MRI for characterizing differences between MR non-visible and visible clinically significant prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol Open 2023; 10:100496. [PMID: 37396490 PMCID: PMC10311200 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100496] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Revised: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 06/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Background around one third of clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa) foci are reported to be MRI non-visible (MRI─). Objective To quantify the differences between MR visible (MRI+) and MRI─ CsPCa using intra- and peri-lesional radiomic features on bi-parametric MRI (bpMRI). Methods This retrospective and multi-institutional study comprised 164 patients with pre-biopsy 3T prostate multi-parametric MRI from 2014 to 2017. The MRI─ CsPCa referred to lesions with PI-RADS v2 score < 3 but ISUP grade group > 1. Three experienced radiologists were involved in annotating lesions and PI-RADS assignment. The validation set (Dv) comprised 52 patients from a single institution, the remaining 112 patients were used for training (Dt). 200 radiomic features were extracted from intra-lesional and peri-lesional regions on bpMRI.Logistic regression with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and 10-fold cross-validation was applied on Dt to identify radiomic features associated with MRI─ and MRI+ CsPCa to generate corresponding risk scores RMRI─ and RMRI+. RbpMRI was further generated by integrating RMRI─ and RMRI+. Statistical significance was determined using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results Both intra-lesional and peri-lesional bpMRI Haralick and CoLlAGe radiomic features were significantly associated with MRI─ CsPCa (p < 0.05). Intra-lesional ADC Haralick and CoLlAGe radiomic features were significantly different among MRI─ and MRI+ CsPCa (p < 0.05). RbpMRI yielded the highest AUC of 0.82 (95 % CI 0.72-0.91) compared to AUCs of RMRI+ 0.76 (95 % CI 0.63-0.89), and PI-RADS 0.58 (95 % CI 0.50-0.72) on Dv. RbpMRI correctly reclassified 10 out of 14 MRI─ CsPCa on Dv. Conclusion Our preliminary results demonstrated that both intra-lesional and peri-lesional bpMRI radiomic features were significantly associated with MRI─ CsPCa. These features could assist in CsPCa identification on bpMRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lin Li
- Center for Computational Imaging and Personalized Diagnostics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Rakesh Shiradkar
- Center for Computational Imaging and Personalized Diagnostics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology
| | | | | | - Pingfu Fu
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Amr Mahran
- Urology Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Christina Buzzy
- Center for Computational Imaging and Personalized Diagnostics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | | | | | - Lee Ponsky
- Urology Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Eric Klein
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Andrei S. Purysko
- Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Anant Madabhushi
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology
- Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Atlanta, GA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Rogers HJ, Singh S, Barnes A, Obuchowski NA, Margolis DJ, Malyarenko DI, Chenevert TL, Shukla-Dave A, Boss MA, Punwani S. Test-retest repeatability of ADC in prostate using the multi b-Value VERDICT acquisition. Eur J Radiol 2023; 162:110782. [PMID: 37004362 PMCID: PMC10334409 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110782] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2023] [Revised: 02/24/2023] [Accepted: 03/10/2023] [Indexed: 03/18/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE VERDICT (Vascular, Extracellular, Restricted Diffusion for Cytometry in Tumours) MRI is a multi b-value, variable diffusion time DWI sequence that allows generation of ADC maps from different b-value and diffusion time combinations. The aim was to assess precision of prostate ADC measurements from varying b-value combinations using VERDICT and determine which protocol provides the most repeatable ADC. MATERIALS AND METHODS Forty-one men (median age: 67.7 years) from a prior prospective VERDICT study (April 2016-October 2017) were analysed retrospectively. Men who were suspected of prostate cancer and scanned twice using VERDICT were included. ADC maps were formed using 5b-value combinations and the within-subject standard deviations (wSD) were calculated per ADC map. Three anatomical locations were analysed per subject: normal TZ (transition zone), normal PZ (peripheral zone), and index lesions. Repeated measures ANOVAs showed which b-value range had the lowest wSD, Spearman correlation and generalized linear model regression analysis determined whether wSD was related to ADC magnitude and ROI size. RESULTS The mean lesion ADC for b0b1500 had the lowest wSD in most zones (0.18-0.58x10-4 mm2/s). The wSD was unaffected by ADC magnitude (Lesion: p = 0.064, TZ: p = 0.368, PZ: p = 0.072) and lesion Likert score (p = 0.95). wSD showed a decrease with ROI size pooled over zones (p = 0.019, adjusted regression coefficient = -1.6x10-3, larger ROIs for TZ versus PZ versus lesions). ADC maps formed with a maximum b-value of 500 s/mm2 had the largest wSDs (1.90-10.24x10-4 mm2/s). CONCLUSION ADC maps generated from b0b1500 have better repeatability in normal TZ, normal PZ, and index lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harriet J Rogers
- Centre for Medical Imaging, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
| | - Saurabh Singh
- Centre for Medical Imaging, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK
| | - Anna Barnes
- Centre for Medical Imaging, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nancy A Obuchowski
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | | | | | - Amita Shukla-Dave
- Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael A Boss
- Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Centre for Medical Imaging, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Atasever S, Azginoglu N, Terzi DS, Terzi R. A comprehensive survey of deep learning research on medical image analysis with focus on transfer learning. Clin Imaging 2023; 94:18-41. [PMID: 36462229 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2022.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2022] [Revised: 10/17/2022] [Accepted: 11/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
This survey aims to identify commonly used methods, datasets, future trends, knowledge gaps, constraints, and limitations in the field to provide an overview of current solutions used in medical image analysis in parallel with the rapid developments in transfer learning (TL). Unlike previous studies, this survey grouped the last five years of current studies for the period between January 2017 and February 2021 according to different anatomical regions and detailed the modality, medical task, TL method, source data, target data, and public or private datasets used in medical imaging. Also, it provides readers with detailed information on technical challenges, opportunities, and future research trends. In this way, an overview of recent developments is provided to help researchers to select the most effective and efficient methods and access widely used and publicly available medical datasets, research gaps, and limitations of the available literature.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sema Atasever
- Computer Engineering Department, Nevsehir Hacı Bektas Veli University, Nevsehir, Turkey.
| | - Nuh Azginoglu
- Computer Engineering Department, Kayseri University, Kayseri, Turkey.
| | | | - Ramazan Terzi
- Computer Engineering Department, Amasya University, Amasya, Turkey.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Brancato V, Brancati N, Esposito G, La Rosa M, Cavaliere C, Allarà C, Romeo V, De Pietro G, Salvatore M, Aiello M, Sangiovanni M. A Two-Step Feature Selection Radiomic Approach to Predict Molecular Outcomes in Breast Cancer. SENSORS (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2023; 23:1552. [PMID: 36772592 PMCID: PMC9921618 DOI: 10.3390/s23031552] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2022] [Revised: 01/13/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
Breast Cancer (BC) is the most common cancer among women worldwide and is characterized by intra- and inter-tumor heterogeneity that strongly contributes towards its poor prognosis. The Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR), Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki67 antigen are the most examined markers depicting BC heterogeneity and have been shown to have a strong impact on BC prognosis. Radiomics can noninvasively predict BC heterogeneity through the quantitative evaluation of medical images, such as Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), which has become increasingly important in the detection and characterization of BC. However, the lack of comprehensive BC datasets in terms of molecular outcomes and MRI modalities, and the absence of a general methodology to build and compare feature selection approaches and predictive models, limit the routine use of radiomics in the BC clinical practice. In this work, a new radiomic approach based on a two-step feature selection process was proposed to build predictors for ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67 markers. An in-house dataset was used, containing 92 multiparametric MRIs of patients with histologically proven BC and all four relevant biomarkers available. Thousands of radiomic features were extracted from post-contrast and subtracted Dynamic Contrast-Enanched (DCE) MRI images, Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) maps, and T2-weighted (T2) images. The two-step feature selection approach was used to identify significant radiomic features properly and then to build the final prediction models. They showed remarkable results in terms of F1-score for all the biomarkers: 84%, 63%, 90%, and 72% for ER, HER2, Ki67, and PR, respectively. When possible, the models were validated on the TCGA/TCIA Breast Cancer dataset, returning promising results (F1-score = 88% for the ER+/ER- classification task). The developed approach efficiently characterized BC heterogeneity according to the examined molecular biomarkers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valentina Brancato
- IRCCS SYNLAB SDN, Istituto di Ricerca Diagnostica e Nucleare, Via E. Gianturco 113, 80143 Naples, Italy
| | - Nadia Brancati
- Institute for High Performance Computing and Networking, National Research Council of Italy (ICAR-CNR), Via P. Castellino 111, 80131 Naples, Italy
| | - Giusy Esposito
- Bio Check Up S.r.l., Via Riviera di Chiaia 9a, 80122 Naples, Italy
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy
| | - Massimo La Rosa
- Institute for High Performance Computing and Networking, National Research Council of Italy (ICAR-CNR), Via P. Castellino 111, 80131 Naples, Italy
| | - Carlo Cavaliere
- IRCCS SYNLAB SDN, Istituto di Ricerca Diagnostica e Nucleare, Via E. Gianturco 113, 80143 Naples, Italy
| | - Ciro Allarà
- Bio Check Up S.r.l., Via Riviera di Chiaia 9a, 80122 Naples, Italy
| | - Valeria Romeo
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy
| | - Giuseppe De Pietro
- Institute for High Performance Computing and Networking, National Research Council of Italy (ICAR-CNR), Via P. Castellino 111, 80131 Naples, Italy
| | - Marco Salvatore
- IRCCS SYNLAB SDN, Istituto di Ricerca Diagnostica e Nucleare, Via E. Gianturco 113, 80143 Naples, Italy
| | - Marco Aiello
- IRCCS SYNLAB SDN, Istituto di Ricerca Diagnostica e Nucleare, Via E. Gianturco 113, 80143 Naples, Italy
| | - Mara Sangiovanni
- Institute for High Performance Computing and Networking, National Research Council of Italy (ICAR-CNR), Via P. Castellino 111, 80131 Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Yang Q, Atkinson D, Fu Y, Syer T, Yan W, Punwani S, Clarkson MJ, Barratt DC, Vercauteren T, Hu Y. Cross-Modality Image Registration Using a Training-Time Privileged Third Modality. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING 2022; 41:3421-3431. [PMID: 35788452 DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2022.3187873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
In this work, we consider the task of pairwise cross-modality image registration, which may benefit from exploiting additional images available only at training time from an additional modality that is different to those being registered. As an example, we focus on aligning intra-subject multiparametric Magnetic Resonance (mpMR) images, between T2-weighted (T2w) scans and diffusion-weighted scans with high b-value (DWI [Formula: see text]). For the application of localising tumours in mpMR images, diffusion scans with zero b-value (DWI [Formula: see text]) are considered easier to register to T2w due to the availability of corresponding features. We propose a learning from privileged modality algorithm, using a training-only imaging modality DWI [Formula: see text], to support the challenging multi-modality registration problems. We present experimental results based on 369 sets of 3D multiparametric MRI images from 356 prostate cancer patients and report, with statistical significance, a lowered median target registration error of 4.34 mm, when registering the holdout DWI [Formula: see text] and T2w image pairs, compared with that of 7.96 mm before registration. Results also show that the proposed learning-based registration networks enabled efficient registration with comparable or better accuracy, compared with a classical iterative algorithm and other tested learning-based methods with/without the additional modality. These compared algorithms also failed to produce any significantly improved alignment between DWI [Formula: see text] and T2w in this challenging application.
Collapse
|
15
|
Boss MA, Snyder BS, Kim E, Flamini D, Englander S, Sundaram KM, Gumpeni N, Palmer SL, Choi H, Froemming AT, Persigehl T, Davenport MS, Malyarenko D, Chenevert TL, Rosen MA. Repeatability and Reproducibility Assessment of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient in the Prostate: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Research Group (ACRIN 6701). J Magn Reson Imaging 2022; 56:668-679. [PMID: 35143059 PMCID: PMC9363527 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.28093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2021] [Revised: 01/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Uncertainty regarding the reproducibility of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) hampers the use of quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in evaluation of the prostate with magnetic resonance imaging MRI. The quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) profile for quantitative DWI claims a within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) for prostate lesion ADC of 0.17. Improved understanding of ADC reproducibility would aid the use of quantitative diffusion in prostate MRI evaluation. PURPOSE Evaluation of the repeatability (same-day) and reproducibility (multi-day) of whole-prostate and focal-lesion ADC assessment in a multi-site setting. STUDY TYPE Prospective multi-institutional. SUBJECTS Twenty-nine males, ages 53 to 80 (median 63) years, following diagnosis of prostate cancer, 10 with focal lesions. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE 3T, single-shot spin-echo diffusion-weighted echo-planar sequence with four b-values. ASSESSMENT Sites qualified for the study using an ice-water phantom with known ADC. Readers performed DWI analyses at visit 1 ("V1") and visit 2 ("V2," 2-14 days after V1), where V2 comprised scans before ("V2pre") and after ("V2post") a "coffee-break" interval with subject removal and repositioning. A single reader segmented the whole prostate. Two readers separately placed region-of-interests for focal lesions. STATISTICAL TESTS Reproducibility and repeatability coefficients for whole prostate and focal lesions derived from median pixel ADC. We estimated the wCV and 95% confidence interval using a variance stabilizing transformation and assessed interreader reliability of focal lesion ADC using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS The ADC biases from b0 -b600 and b0 -b800 phantom scans averaged 1.32% and 1.44%, respectively; mean b-value dependence was 0.188%. Repeatability and reproducibility of whole prostate median pixel ADC both yielded wCVs of 0.033 (N = 29). In 10 subjects with an evaluable focal lesion, the individual reader wCVs were 0.148 and 0.074 (repeatability) and 0.137 and 0.078 (reproducibility). All time points demonstrated good to excellent interreader reliability for focal lesion ADC (ICCV1 = 0.89; ICCV2pre = 0.76; ICCV2post = 0.94). DATA CONCLUSION This study met the QIBA claim for prostate ADC. Test-retest repeatability and multi-day reproducibility were largely equivalent. Interreader reliability for focal lesion ADC was high across time points. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2 TOC CATEGORY: Pelvis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael A. Boss
- Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Bradley S. Snyder
- Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Eunhee Kim
- Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Dena Flamini
- Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Sarah Englander
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Karthik M. Sundaram
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Naveen Gumpeni
- Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Suzanne L. Palmer
- Department of Radiology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Haesun Choi
- Department of Abdominal Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | | | | | - Dariya Malyarenko
- Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | | | - Mark A. Rosen
- Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Ye S, Lim JY, Huang W. Statistical considerations for repeatability and reproducibility of quantitative imaging biomarkers. BJR Open 2022; 4:20210083. [PMID: 36452056 PMCID: PMC9667479 DOI: 10.1259/bjro.20210083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2021] [Revised: 07/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are increasingly used in clinical studies. Because many QIBs are derived through multiple steps in image data acquisition and data analysis, QIB measurements can produce large variabilities, posing a significant challenge in translating QIBs into clinical trials, and ultimately, clinical practice. Both repeatability and reproducibility constitute the reliability of a QIB measurement. In this article, we review the statistical aspects of repeatability and reproducibility of QIB measurements by introducing methods and metrics for assessments of QIB repeatability and reproducibility and illustrating the impact of QIB measurement error on sample size and statistical power calculations, as well as predictive performance with a QIB as a predictive biomarker.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shangyuan Ye
- Biostatistics Shared Resource, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Jeong Youn Lim
- Biostatistics Shared Resource, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, United States
| | - Wei Huang
- Advanced Imaging Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, United States
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Rai R, Barton MB, Chlap P, Liney G, Brink C, Vinod S, Heinke M, Trada Y, Holloway LC. Repeatability and reproducibility of magnetic resonance imaging-based radiomic features in rectal cancer. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2022; 9:044005. [PMID: 35992729 PMCID: PMC9386367 DOI: 10.1117/1.jmi.9.4.044005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2022] [Accepted: 08/09/2022] [Indexed: 08/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Radiomics of magnetic resonance images (MRIs) in rectal cancer can non-invasively characterize tumor heterogeneity with potential to discover new imaging biomarkers. However, for radiomics to be reliable, the imaging features measured must be stable and reproducible. The aim of this study is to quantify the repeatability and reproducibility of MRI-based radiomic features in rectal cancer. Approach: An MRI radiomics phantom was used to measure the longitudinal repeatability of radiomic features and the impact of post-processing changes related to image resolution and noise. Repeatability measurements in rectal cancers were also quantified in a cohort of 10 patients with test-retest imaging among two observers. Results: We found that many radiomic features, particularly from texture classes, were highly sensitive to changes in image resolution and noise. About 49% of features had coefficient of variations ≤ 10 % in longitudinal phantom measurements. About 75% of radiomic features in in vivo test-retest measurements had an intraclass correlation coefficient of ≥ 0.8 . We saw excellent interobserver agreement with mean Dice similarity coefficient of 0.95 ± 0.04 for test and retest scans. Conclusions: The results of this study show that even when using a consistent imaging protocol many radiomic features were unstable. Therefore, caution must be taken when selecting features for potential imaging biomarkers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robba Rai
- University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Michael B. Barton
- University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Phillip Chlap
- University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gary Liney
- University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Carsten Brink
- Odense University Hospital, Laboratory of Radiation Physics, Department of Oncology, Odense, Denmark
- University of Southern Denmark, Department of Clinical Research, Odense, Denmark
| | - Shalini Vinod
- University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Yuvnik Trada
- Calvary Mater Newcastle, Department of Radiation Oncology, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Lois C. Holloway
- University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
- University of Wollongong, Centre of Radiation Physics, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
- University of Sydney, Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Analysis of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters of Prostate Cancer Patients after Diagnosis and Treatment with Magnetic Resonance Imaging. COMPUTATIONAL AND MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN MEDICINE 2022; 2022:3111054. [PMID: 35785146 PMCID: PMC9246578 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3111054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2022] [Revised: 06/08/2022] [Accepted: 06/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
This research was aimed at exploring the changes in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) parameters of prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Sixty PCa patients from the hospital were recruited as the research object, and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) scans were performed to determine the shape, scope, and enhancement characteristics of prostate lesions and their relationship with surrounding tissues. The quantitative parameters of ADC and DCE-MRI were measured. There were 4 patients (6.67%) with a Gleason score of 6 and 15 patients (25%) with a 4 + 3 score. The ADC with Gleason = 6 is 0.81 ± 0.08 × 10−3 s/mm2, the ADC with Gleason = 3 + 4 is 0.74 ± 0.07 × 10−3 s/mm2, the ADC with Gleason = 4 + 3 is 0.73 ± 0.05 × 10−3 s/mm2, the ADC with Gleason = 9 is 0.65 ± 0.06 × 10−3 s/mm2, and the ADC with Gleason = 10 is 0.59 ± 0.07 × 10−3 s/mm2. As the Gleason score increased, the ADC decreased and the permeation parameter transfer constant increased. When the ADC was combined with the permeability parameter transfer constant, the AUC of Gleason = 6 points and Gleason = 7 points was greatly different (P < 0.05). The 95% CI of the ADC combined permeability parameter transport constant when Gleason = 6 points and Gleason = 7 points was 0.898-0.934, the sensitivity was 75.4%, and the specificity was 86.2%. The ADC value was negatively correlated with Gleason score. The ADC value combined with VTC value has good diagnostic performance in evaluating the invasion of PCa, which is very important for making treatment plan and evaluating prognosis.
Collapse
|
19
|
Sushentsev N, Caglic I, Rundo L, Kozlov V, Sala E, Gnanapragasam VJ, Barrett T. Serial changes in tumour measurements and apparent diffusion coefficients in prostate cancer patients on active surveillance with and without histopathological progression. Br J Radiol 2022; 95:20210842. [PMID: 34538077 PMCID: PMC8978242 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2021] [Revised: 08/03/2021] [Accepted: 08/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To analyse serial changes in MRI-derived tumour measurements and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in prostate cancer (PCa) patients on active surveillance (AS) with and without histopathological disease progression. METHODS This study included AS patients with biopsy-proven PCa with a minimum of two consecutive MR examinations and at least one repeat targeted biopsy. Tumour volumes, largest axial two-dimensional (2D) surface areas, and maximum diameters were measured on T2 weighted images (T2WI). ADC values were derived from the whole lesions, 2D areas, and small-volume regions of interest (ROIs) where tumours were most conspicuous. Areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) were calculated for combinations of T2WI and ADC parameters with optimal specificity and sensitivity. RESULTS 60 patients (30 progressors and 30 non-progressors) were included. In progressors, T2WI-derived tumour volume, 2D surface area, and maximum tumour diameter had a median increase of +99.5%,+55.3%, and +21.7% compared to +29.2%,+8.1%, and +6.9% in non-progressors (p < 0.005 for all). Follow-up whole-volume and small-volume ROIs ADC values were significantly reduced in progressors (-11.7% and -9.5%) compared to non-progressors (-6.1% and -1.6%) (p < 0.05 for both). The combined AUC of a relative increase in maximum tumour diameter by 20% and reduction in small-volume ADC by 10% was 0.67. CONCLUSION AS patients show significant differences in tumour measurements and ADC values between those with and without histopathological disease progression. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE This paper proposes specific clinical cut-offs for T2WI-derived maximum tumour diameter (+20%) and small-volume ADC (-10%) to predict histopathological PCa progression on AS and supplement subjective serial MRI assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikita Sushentsev
- Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke’s Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Iztok Caglic
- Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke’s Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Vasily Kozlov
- Department of Public Health and Healthcare Organisation, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | | | | | - Tristan Barrett
- Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke’s Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Granzier RWY, Ibrahim A, Primakov S, Keek SA, Halilaj I, Zwanenburg A, Engelen SME, Lobbes MBI, Lambin P, Woodruff HC, Smidt ML. Test-Retest Data for the Assessment of Breast MRI Radiomic Feature Repeatability. J Magn Reson Imaging 2021; 56:592-604. [PMID: 34936160 PMCID: PMC9544420 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.28027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2021] [Revised: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 12/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Radiomic features extracted from breast MRI have potential for diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive purposes. However, before they can be used as biomarkers in clinical decision support systems, features need to be repeatable and reproducible. Objective Identify repeatable radiomics features within breast tissue on prospectively collected MRI exams through multiple test–retest measurements. Study Type Prospective. Population 11 healthy female volunteers. Field Strength/Sequence 1.5 T; MRI exams, comprising T2‐weighted turbo spin‐echo (T2W) sequence, native T1‐weighted turbo gradient‐echo (T1W) sequence, diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) sequence using b‐values 0/150/800, and corresponding derived ADC maps. Assessment 18 MRI exams (three test–retest settings, repeated on 2 days) per healthy volunteer were examined on an identical scanner using a fixed clinical breast protocol. For each scan, 91 features were extracted from the 3D manually segmented right breast using Pyradiomics, before and after image preprocessing. Image preprocessing consisted of 1) bias field correction (BFC); 2) z‐score normalization with and without BFC; 3) grayscale discretization using 32 and 64 bins with and without BFC; and 4) z‐score normalization + grayscale discretization using 32 and 64 bins with and without BFC. Statistical Tests Features' repeatability was assessed using concordance correlation coefficient(CCC) for each pair, i.e. each MRI was compared to each of the remaining 17 MRI with a cut‐off value of CCC > 0.90. Results Images without preprocessing produced the highest number of repeatable features for both T1W sequence and ADC maps with 15 of 91 (16.5%) and 8 of 91 (8.8%) repeatable features, respectively. Preprocessed images produced between 4 of 91 (4.4%) and 14 of 91 (15.4%), and 6 of 91 (6.6%) and 7 of 91 (7.7%) repeatable features, respectively for T1W and ADC maps. Z‐score normalization produced highest number of repeatable features, 26 of 91 (28.6%) in T2W sequences, in these images, no preprocessing produced 11 of 91 (12.1%) repeatable features. Data Conclusion Radiomic features extracted from T1W, T2W sequences and ADC maps from breast MRI exams showed a varying number of repeatable features, depending on the sequence. Effects of different preprocessing procedures on repeatability of features were different for each sequence. Level of Evidence 2 Technical Efficacy Stage 1
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R W Y Granzier
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - A Ibrahim
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Division of Nuclear Medicine and Oncological Imaging, Department of Medical Physics, Hospital Center Universitaire De Liege, Liege, Belgium.,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Comprehensive diagnostic center Aachen (CDCA), University Hospital RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
| | - S Primakov
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - S A Keek
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - I Halilaj
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Health Innovation Ventures, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - A Zwanenburg
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden, Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz Association/Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
| | - S M E Engelen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - M B I Lobbes
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Medical Imaging, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, the Netherlands
| | - P Lambin
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - H C Woodruff
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - M L Smidt
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Langbein BJ, Szczepankiewicz F, Westin CF, Bay C, Maier SE, Kibel AS, Tempany CM, Fenness FM. A Pilot Study of Multidimensional Diffusion MRI for Assessment of Tissue Heterogeneity in Prostate Cancer. Invest Radiol 2021; 56:845-853. [PMID: 34049334 PMCID: PMC8626531 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000796] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The objectives of this exploratory study were to investigate the feasibility of multidimensional diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MddMRI) in assessing diffusion heterogeneity at both a macroscopic and microscopic level in prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS Informed consent was obtained from 46 subjects who underwent 3.0-T prostate multiparametric MRI, complemented with a prototype spin echo-based MddMRI sequence in this institutional review board-approved study. Prostate cancer tumors and comparative normal tissue from each patient were contoured on both apparent diffusion coefficient and MddMRI-derived mean diffusivity (MD) maps (from which microscopic diffusion heterogeneity [MKi] and microscopic diffusion anisotropy were derived) using 3D Slicer. The discriminative ability of MddMRI-derived parameters to differentiate PCa from normal tissue was determined using the Friedman test. To determine if tumor diffusion heterogeneity is similar on macroscopic and microscopic scales, the linear association between SD of MD and mean MKi was estimated using robust regression (bisquare weighting). Hypothesis testing was 2 tailed; P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS All MddMRI-derived parameters could distinguish tumor from normal tissue in the fixed-effects analysis (P < 0.0001). Tumor MKi was higher (P < 0.05) compared with normal tissue (median, 0.40; interquartile range, 0.29-0.52 vs 0.20-0.18; 0.25), as was tumor microscopic diffusion anisotropy (0.55; 0.36-0.81 vs 0.20-0.15; 0.28). The MKi could not be predicted (no significant association) by SD of MD. There was a significant correlation between tumor volume and SD of MD (R2 = 0.50, slope = 0.008 μm2/ms per millimeter, P < 0.001) but not between tumor volume and MKi. CONCLUSIONS This explorative study demonstrates that MddMRI provides novel information on MKi and microscopic anisotropy, which differ from measures at the macroscopic level. MddMRI has the potential to characterize tumor tissue heterogeneity at different spatial scales.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Björn J. Langbein
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- University Clinic Magdeburg, Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Filip Szczepankiewicz
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Carl-Fredrik Westin
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Camden Bay
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Stephan E. Maier
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Adam S. Kibel
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
- Department of Urology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
| | - Clare M. Tempany
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Fiona M. Fenness
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Xing P, Chen L, Yang Q, Song T, Ma C, Grimm R, Fu C, Wang T, Peng W, Lu J. Differentiating prostate cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia using whole-lesion histogram and texture analysis of diffusion- and T2-weighted imaging. Cancer Imaging 2021; 21:54. [PMID: 34579789 PMCID: PMC8477463 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-021-00423-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2020] [Accepted: 09/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To explore the usefulness of analyzing histograms and textures of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps and T2-weighted (T2W) images to differentiate prostatic cancer (PCa) from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) using histopathology as the reference. Methods Ninety patients with PCa and 112 patients with BPH were included in this retrospective study. Differences in whole-lesion histograms and texture parameters of ADC maps and T2W images between PCa and BPH patients were evaluated using the independent samples t-test. The diagnostic performance of ADC maps and T2W images in being able to differentiate PCa from BPH was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results The mean, median, 5th, and 95th percentiles of ADC values in images from PCa patients were significantly lower than those from BPH patients (p < 0.05). Significant differences were observed in the means, standard deviations, medians, kurtosis, skewness, and 5th percentile values of T2W image between PCa and BPH patients (p < 0.05). The ADC5th showed the largest AUC (0.906) with a sensitivity of 83.3 % and specificity of 89.3 %. The diagnostic performance of the T2W image histogram and texture analysis was moderate and had the largest AUC of 0.634 for T2WKurtosis with a sensitivity and specificity of 48.9% and 79.5 %, respectively. The diagnostic performance of the combined ADC5th & T2WKurtosis parameters was also similar to that of the ADC5th & ADCDiff−Variance. Conclusions Histogram and texture parameters derived from the ADC maps and T2W images for entire prostatic lesions could be used as imaging biomarkers to differentiate PCa and BPH biologic characteristics, however, histogram parameters outperformed texture parameters in the diagnostic performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pengyi Xing
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Luguang Chen
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Qingsong Yang
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Tao Song
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Chao Ma
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Robert Grimm
- Application Predevelopment, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Caixia Fu
- MR Application Development, Siemens Shenzhen Magnetic Resonance Ltd, Shenzhen, China
| | - Tiegong Wang
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Wenjia Peng
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China
| | - Jianping Lu
- Department of Radiology, Changhai Hospital of Shanghai, The Second Military Medical University, No.168 Changhai Road, 200433, Shanghai, China.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Stocker D, Manoliu A, Becker AS, Barth BK, Nanz D, Klarhöfer M, Donati OF. Impact of different phased-array coils on the quality of prostate magnetic resonance images. Eur J Radiol Open 2021; 8:100327. [PMID: 33644263 PMCID: PMC7889823 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejro.2021.100327] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2021] [Accepted: 01/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Image quality is similar for different body phased-array receive coil setups. An 18-channel body phased-array receive coil setup achieved good image quality. 60-channel body phased-array receive coil setup slightly improves SNR in T2W images.
Purpose To evaluate the influence of body phased-array (BPA) receive coil setups on signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and image quality (IQ) in prostate MRI. Methods This prospective study evaluated axial T2-weighted images (T2W-TSE) and DWI of the prostate in ten healthy volunteers with 18-channel (18CH), 30-channel and 60-channel (60CH) BPA receive coil setups. SNR and ADC values were assessed in the peripheral and transition zones (TZ). Two radiologists rated IQ features. Differences in qualitative and quantitative image features between BPA receive coil setups were compared. After correction for multiple comparisons, p-values <0.004 for quantitative and p-values <0.017 for qualitative image analysis were considered statistically significant. Results Significantly higher SNR was found in T2W-TSE images in the TZ using 60CH BPA compared to 18CH BPA coil setups (15.20 ± 4.22 vs. 7.68 ± 2.37; p = 0.001). There were no significant differences between all other quantitative (T2W-TSE, p = 0.007−0.308; DWI, p = 0.024−0.574) and qualitative image features (T2W-TSE, p = 0.083–1.0; DWI, p = 0.046–1.0). Conclusion 60CH BPA receive coil setup showed marginal SNR improvement in T2W-TSE images. Good IQ could be achieved with 18CH BPA coil setups.
Collapse
Key Words
- 18CH, BPA 18-channel body array coil
- 30CH, BPA 30-channel body array coil
- 60CH, BPA 60-channel body array coil
- ANOVA, Analysis of variances
- BPA, Body phased-array
- ERC, Endorectal coil
- ICC, Intra-class correlation coefficient
- IQR, Interquartile range
- Magnetic resonance imaging
- PSTT, Post-hoc paired-sample t-tests
- Prostate imaging
- ROIs, Region of interests
- SD, Standard deviation
- SNR, Signal to noise ratio
- Signal-to-noise ratio
- T2W-TSE, T2-weighted turbo spin echo
- mpMRI, Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging
- ss-DWI-EPI, Single-shot diffusion-weighting spin-echo echo-planar imaging
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Stocker
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Andrei Manoliu
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland
- Max-Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, London, UK
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL, London, UK
- Psychiatric University Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Anton S. Becker
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Borna K. Barth
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Nanz
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland
- Swiss Center for Musculoskeletal Imaging, SCMI, Balgrist Campus AG, Switzerland and Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Olivio F. Donati
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Switzerland
- Corresponding author at: Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Brancato V, Aiello M, Basso L, Monti S, Palumbo L, Di Costanzo G, Salvatore M, Ragozzino A, Cavaliere C. Evaluation of a multiparametric MRI radiomic-based approach for stratification of equivocal PI-RADS 3 and upgraded PI-RADS 4 prostatic lesions. Sci Rep 2021; 11:643. [PMID: 33436929 PMCID: PMC7804929 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80749-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2020] [Accepted: 12/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite the key-role of the Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in the diagnosis and characterization of prostate cancer (PCa), this system remains to be affected by several limitations, primarily associated with the interpretation of equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions and with the debated role of Dynamic Contrast Enhanced-Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI), which is only used to upgrade peripheral PI-RADS category 3 lesions to PI-RADS category 4 if enhancement is focal. We aimed at investigating the usefulness of radiomics for detection of PCa lesions (Gleason Score ≥ 6) in PI-RADS 3 lesions and in peripheral PI-RADS 3 upgraded to PI-RADS 4 lesions (upPI-RADS 4). Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) data of patients who underwent prostatic mpMRI between April 2013 and September 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. Biopsy results were used as gold standard. PI-RADS 3 and PI-RADS 4 lesions were re-scored according to the PI-RADS v2.1 before and after DCE-MRI evaluation. Radiomic features were extracted from T2-weighted MRI (T2), Apparent diffusion Coefficient (ADC) map and DCE-MRI subtracted images using PyRadiomics. Feature selection was performed using Wilcoxon-ranksum test and Minimum Redundancy Maximum Relevance (mRMR). Predictive models were constructed for PCa detection in PI-RADS 3 and upPI-RADS 4 lesions using at each step an imbalance-adjusted bootstrap resampling (IABR) on 1000 samples. 41 PI-RADS 3 and 32 upPI-RADS 4 lesions were analyzed. Among 293 radiomic features, the top selected features derived from T2 and ADC. For PI-RADS 3 stratification, second order model showed higher performances (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve-AUC- = 80%), while for upPI-RADS 4 stratification, first order model showed higher performances respect to superior order models (AUC = 89%). Our results support the significant role of T2 and ADC radiomic features for PCa detection in lesions scored as PI-RADS 3 and upPI-RADS 4. Radiomics models showed high diagnostic efficacy in classify PI-RADS 3 and upPI-RADS 4 lesions, outperforming PI-RADS v2.1 performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Serena Monti
- Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Naples, Italy
| | - Luigi Palumbo
- Department of Radiology, S. Maria Delle Grazie Hospital, Pozzuoli, Italy
| | | | | | - Alfonso Ragozzino
- Department of Radiology, S. Maria Delle Grazie Hospital, Pozzuoli, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Quantitative MRI: Defining repeatability, reproducibility and accuracy for prostate cancer imaging biomarker development. Magn Reson Imaging 2021; 77:169-179. [PMID: 33388362 DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2020.12.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2020] [Revised: 11/25/2020] [Accepted: 12/29/2020] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Quantitative MRI (qMRI) parameters have been increasingly used to develop predictive models to accurately monitor treatment response in prostate cancer after radiotherapy. To reliably detect changes in signal due to treatment response, predictive models require qMRI parameters with high repeatability and reproducibility. The purpose of this study was to measure qMRI parameter uncertainties in both commercial and in-house developed phantoms to guide the development of robust predictive models for monitoring treatment response. MATERIALS AND METHODS ADC, T1, and R2* values were acquired across three 3 T scanners with a prostate-specific qMRI protocol using the NIST/ISMRM system phantom, RSNA/NIST diffusion phantom, and an in-house phantom. A B1 field map was acquired to correct for flip angle inhomogeneity in T1 maps. All sequences were repeated in each scan to assess within-session repeatability. Weekly scans were acquired on one scanner for three months with the in-house phantom. Between-session repeatability was measured with test-retest scans 6-months apart on all scanners with all phantoms. Accuracy, defined as percentage deviation from reference value for ADC and T1, was evaluated using the system and diffusion phantoms. Repeatability and reproducibility coefficients of variation (%CV) were calculated for all qMRI parameters on all phantoms. RESULTS Overall, repeatability CV of ADC was <2.40%, reproducibility CV was <3.98%, and accuracy ranged between -8.0% to 2.7% across all scanners. Applying B1 correction on T1 measurements significantly improved the repeatability and reproducibility (p<0.05) but increased error in accuracy (p<0.001). Repeatability and reproducibility of R2* was <4.5% and <7.3% respectively in the system phantom across all scanners. CONCLUSION Repeatability, reproducibility, and accuracy in qMRI parameters from a prostate-specific protocol was estimated using both commercial and in-house phantoms. Results from this work will be used to identify robust qMRI parameters for use in the development of predictive models to longitudinally monitor treatment response for prostate cancer in current and future clinical trials.
Collapse
|
26
|
Multiparametric MRI as a Biomarker of Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer-A Pilot Study. Acad Radiol 2020; 27:1432-1439. [PMID: 31862185 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2019.10.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/13/2019] [Revised: 10/18/2019] [Accepted: 10/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To explore a role for multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) as a biomarker of response to neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant. Eight patients with localized PCa had a baseline mpMRI, repeated after 6-months of ADT, followed by prostatectomy. mpMRI indices were extracted from tumor and normal regions of interest (TROI/NROI). Residual cancer burden (RCB) was measured on mpMRI and on the prostatectomy specimen. Paired t-tests compared TROI/NROI mpMRI indices and pre/post-treatment TROI mpMRI indices. Spearman's rank tested for correlations between MRI/pathology-based RCB, and between pathological RCB and mpMRI indices. RESULTS At baseline, TROI apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was lower and dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) metrics were higher, compared to NROI (ADC: 806 ± 137 × 10-6 vs. 1277 ± 213 × 10-6 mm2/sec, p = 0.0005; Ktrans: 0.346 ± 0.16 vs. 0.144 ± 0.06 min-1, p = 0.002; AUC90: 0.213 ± 0.08 vs. 0.11 ± 0.03, p = 0.002). Post-treatment, there was no change in TROI ADC, but a decrease in TROI Ktrans (0.346 ± 0.16 to 0.188 ± 0.08 min-1; p = 0.02) and AUC90 (0.213 ± 0.08 to 0.13 ± 0.06; p = 0.02). Tumor volume decreased with ADT. There was no difference between mpMRI-based and pathology-based RCB, which positively correlated (⍴ = 0.74-0.81, p < 0.05). Pathology-based RCB positively correlated with post-treatment DCE metrics (⍴ = 0.76-0.70, p < 0.05) and negatively with ADC (⍴ = -0.79, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION Given the heterogeneity of PCa, an individualized approach to ADT may maximize potential benefit. This pilot study suggests that mpMRI may serve as a biomarker of ADT response and as a surrogate for RCB at prostatectomy.
Collapse
|
27
|
Hagiwara A, Fujita S, Ohno Y, Aoki S. Variability and Standardization of Quantitative Imaging: Monoparametric to Multiparametric Quantification, Radiomics, and Artificial Intelligence. Invest Radiol 2020; 55:601-616. [PMID: 32209816 PMCID: PMC7413678 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 73] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Radiological images have been assessed qualitatively in most clinical settings by the expert eyes of radiologists and other clinicians. On the other hand, quantification of radiological images has the potential to detect early disease that may be difficult to detect with human eyes, complement or replace biopsy, and provide clear differentiation of disease stage. Further, objective assessment by quantification is a prerequisite of personalized/precision medicine. This review article aims to summarize and discuss how the variability of quantitative values derived from radiological images are induced by a number of factors and how these variabilities are mitigated and standardization of the quantitative values are achieved. We discuss the variabilities of specific biomarkers derived from magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography, and focus on diffusion-weighted imaging, relaxometry, lung density evaluation, and computer-aided computed tomography volumetry. We also review the sources of variability and current efforts of standardization of the rapidly evolving techniques, which include radiomics and artificial intelligence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akifumi Hagiwara
- From the Department of Radiology, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo
| | | | - Yoshiharu Ohno
- Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan
| | - Shigeki Aoki
- From the Department of Radiology, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Izquierdo-Garcia D, Eldaief MC, Vangel MG, Catana C. Intrascanner Reproducibility of an SPM-based Head MR-based Attenuation Correction Method. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RADIATION AND PLASMA MEDICAL SCIENCES 2020; 3:327-333. [PMID: 32537528 DOI: 10.1109/trpms.2018.2868946] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Recently, an exhaustive examination of 11 state of the art MR-based attenuation correction (AC) concluded that there are currently a few methods showing similar results compared to the gold-standard, CT-based AC. While the study presented a thorough portfolio of metrics to quantify accuracy (bias) and quality, it lacked one of the most important metrics to quantify robustness that is critical for its clinical applicability: intrascanner reproducibility (repeatability). In this work, we provide for the first time a study of the repeatability of one of the outperforming brain MR-based AC methods: the SPM-based pseudo-CT approach. 22 subjects undergoing 3 18F-FDG PET/MRI visits within 2 months were retrospectively analyzed in this study. Pseudo-CT mu-maps were obtained from the coregistered MR images for all 3 visits and the PET data from visit 1 was reconstructed using all three mu-maps. Relative changes (RC), Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Reproducibility coefficient (RDC95%) and Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) were used to measure repeatability. Voxel-based and ROI-based results showed that absolute RC for the reconstructed PET images are within ~2%. The brain cortex and the cerebellum were the regions with the largest variability (~3%). The differences across visits were not statistically significant (p=0.90). In conclusion this study shows for the first time the repeatability of the SPM-based pseudo-CT approach for brain MR-AC. These results, in addition to the ease of implementation and the quality and robustness previously demonstrated, confer this SPM-based method an ideal candidate for routine brain PET/MRI research and clinical studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Izquierdo-Garcia
- Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School, Bld. 149, 13 St. Room 1106, Charlestown, MA 02129
| | - Mark C Eldaief
- Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School, Bld. 149, 13 St. Room 1106, Charlestown, MA 02129
| | - Mark G Vangel
- Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School, Bld. 149, 13 St. Room 1106, Charlestown, MA 02129
| | - Ciprian Catana
- Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital / Harvard Medical School, Bld. 149, 13 St. Room 1106, Charlestown, MA 02129
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Lu H, Parra NA, Qi J, Gage K, Li Q, Fan S, Feuerlein S, Pow-Sang J, Gillies R, Choi JW, Balagurunathan Y. Repeatability of Quantitative Imaging Features in Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Front Oncol 2020; 10:551. [PMID: 32457827 PMCID: PMC7221156 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00551] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 03/27/2020] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has emerged as a non-invasive modality to diagnose and monitor prostate cancer. Quantitative metrics on the regions of abnormality have shown to be useful descriptors to discriminate clinically significant cancers. In this study, we evaluate the reproducibility of quantitative imaging features using repeated mpMRI on the same patients. Methods: We retrospectively obtained the deidentified records of patients, who underwent two mpMRI scans within 2 weeks of the first baseline scan. The patient records were obtained as deidentified data (including imaging), obtained through the TCIA (The Cancer Imaging Archive) repository and analyzed in our institution with an institutional review board-approved Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective study protocol. Indicated biopsied regions were used as a marker for our study radiologists to delineate the regions of interest. We extracted 307 quantitative features in each mpMRI modality [T2-weighted MR sequence image (T2w) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) with b values of 0 and 1,400 mm/s2] across the two sequential scans. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) were computed on the features extracted from sequential scans. Redundant features were removed by computing the coefficient of determination (R 2) among them and replaced with a feature that had the highest dynamic range within intercorrelated groups. Results: We have assessed the reproducibility of quantitative imaging features among sequential scans and found that habitat region characterization improves repeatability in ADC maps. There were 19 T2w features and two ADC features in radiologist drawn regions (native raw image), compared to 18 T2w and 15 ADC features in habitat regions (sphere), which were reproducible (CCC ≥0.65) and non-redundant (R 2 ≥ 0.99). We also found that z-transformation of the images prior to feature extraction reduced the number of reproducible features with no detrimental effect. Conclusion: We have shown that there are quantitative imaging features that are reproducible across sequential prostate mpMRI acquisition at a preset level of filters. We also found that a habitat approach improves feature repeatability in ADC. A validated set of reproducible image features in mpMRI will allow us to develop clinically useful disease risk stratification, enabling the possibility of using imaging as a surrogate to invasive biopsies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hong Lu
- Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical and Cancer Hospital, Tianjin, China
- Departments of Cancer Physiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Nestor A. Parra
- Departments of Cancer Physiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Jin Qi
- Departments of Cancer Physiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Kenneth Gage
- Departments of Diagnostic Imaging, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Qian Li
- Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical and Cancer Hospital, Tianjin, China
| | - Shuxuan Fan
- Department of Radiology, Tianjin Medical and Cancer Hospital, Tianjin, China
- Departments of Cancer Physiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Sebastian Feuerlein
- Departments of Diagnostic Imaging, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Julio Pow-Sang
- Departments of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Robert Gillies
- Departments of Cancer Physiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
- Departments of Diagnostic Imaging, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Jung W. Choi
- Departments of Diagnostic Imaging, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| | - Yoganand Balagurunathan
- Departments of Diagnostic Imaging, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
- Departments of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
- Departments of Bioinformatics & Biostatistics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Clunie D, Onken M, Riesmeier J, Herz C, Bauer C, Beers A, Fillion-Robin JC, Lasso A, Pinter C, Pieper S, Nolden M, Maier-Hein K, Herrmann MD, Saltz J, Prior F, Fennessy F, Buatti J, Kikinis R. Quantitative Imaging Informatics for Cancer Research. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2020; 4:444-453. [PMID: 32392097 PMCID: PMC7265794 DOI: 10.1200/cci.19.00165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/16/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We summarize Quantitative Imaging Informatics for Cancer Research (QIICR; U24 CA180918), one of the first projects funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Informatics Technology for Cancer Research program. METHODS QIICR was motivated by the 3 use cases from the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network. 3D Slicer was selected as the platform for implementation of open-source quantitative imaging (QI) tools. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) was chosen for standardization of QI analysis outputs. Support of improved integration with community repositories focused on The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA). Priorities included improved capabilities of the standard, toolkits and tools, reference datasets, collaborations, and training and outreach. RESULTS Fourteen new tools to support head and neck cancer, glioblastoma, and prostate cancer QI research were introduced and downloaded over 100,000 times. DICOM was amended, with over 40 correction proposals addressing QI needs. Reference implementations of the standard in a popular toolkit and standalone tools were introduced. Eight datasets exemplifying the application of the standard and tools were contributed. An open demonstration/connectathon was organized, attracting the participation of academic groups and commercial vendors. Integration of tools with TCIA was improved by implementing programmatic communication interface and by refining best practices for QI analysis results curation. CONCLUSION Tools, capabilities of the DICOM standard, and datasets we introduced found adoption and utility within the cancer imaging community. A collaborative approach is critical to addressing challenges in imaging informatics at the national and international levels. Numerous challenges remain in establishing and maintaining the infrastructure of analysis tools and standardized datasets for the imaging community. Ideas and technology developed by the QIICR project are contributing to the NCI Imaging Data Commons currently being developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrey Fedorov
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Christian Herz
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Marco Nolden
- German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Markus D. Herrmann
- Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | - Fred Prior
- University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR
| | - Fiona Fennessy
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | | | - Ron Kikinis
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Zhu Q, Du B, Yan P. Boundary-Weighted Domain Adaptive Neural Network for Prostate MR Image Segmentation. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING 2020; 39:753-763. [PMID: 31425022 PMCID: PMC7015773 DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2019.2935018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 74] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/18/2023]
Abstract
Accurate segmentation of the prostate from magnetic resonance (MR) images provides useful information for prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment. However, automated prostate segmentation from 3D MR images faces several challenges. The lack of clear edge between the prostate and other anatomical structures makes it challenging to accurately extract the boundaries. The complex background texture and large variation in size, shape and intensity distribution of the prostate itself make segmentation even further complicated. Recently, as deep learning, especially convolutional neural networks (CNNs), emerging as the best performed methods for medical image segmentation, the difficulty in obtaining large number of annotated medical images for training CNNs has become much more pronounced than ever. Since large-scale dataset is one of the critical components for the success of deep learning, lack of sufficient training data makes it difficult to fully train complex CNNs. To tackle the above challenges, in this paper, we propose a boundary-weighted domain adaptive neural network (BOWDA-Net). To make the network more sensitive to the boundaries during segmentation, a boundary-weighted segmentation loss is proposed. Furthermore, an advanced boundary-weighted transfer leaning approach is introduced to address the problem of small medical imaging datasets. We evaluate our proposed model on three different MR prostate datasets. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed model is more sensitive to object boundaries and outperformed other state-of-the-art methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qikui Zhu
- School of Computer Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
| | - Bo Du
- co-corresponding authors: B. Du (), P. Yan ()
| | - Pingkun Yan
- co-corresponding authors: B. Du (), P. Yan ()
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Are superior cervical sympathetic ganglia avid on whole body 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/magnetic resonance?: a comprehensive morphologic and molecular assessment in patients with prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2020; 40:1105-1111. [PMID: 31469805 DOI: 10.1097/mnm.0000000000001083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Recent reports warn against erroneous mistaking of celiac and stellate sympathetic ganglia for metastatic lymph nodes on multimodal prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand PET imaging. The aim was to check the intensity of Ga-PSMA-11 uptake and magnetic resonance (MR) features of superior cervical ganglia (SCG) on PET/MR imaging. METHODS In 89 patients 106 SCG were reliably identified on Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MR. For each SCG, qualitative assessment (visual subjective avidity, diffusion restriction, shape, and the presence of central hypointensity) and quantitative measurements [dimensions, maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax), mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)] were performed. RESULTS Mean SUVmax in SCG amounted to 1.88 ± 0.63 (range: 0.87-4.42), with considerable metabolic activity (SUVmax ≥ 2) in 37.7% of SCG; mean thickness was 3.18 ± 1.08 mm. In subjective visual evaluation, SCG avidity was classified as mistakable or potentially mistakable with underlying malignancy in 32.1% of cases. Mean ADC values amounted 1749.83 ± 428.83 × 10mm/s. In visual assessment, 74.5% of ganglia showed moderate to high diffusion restriction. An oval or longitudinal shape on transverse MR plane was presented by 59.4% of SCG. The central hypointensity was detected on MR T2-weighted images only in 10.4% of SCG. CONCLUSION SCG, similar to other sympathetic ganglia, show Ga-PSMA-11 uptake. SCG avidity may be of significance, especially in view of frequently occurring SCG oval or longitudinal shape, and moderate to high diffusion restriction in visual assessment, potentially suggesting malignancy on transverse MR plane. Diagnostic imaging specialists and clinicians should be aware of the above.
Collapse
|
33
|
A Single-Arm, Multicenter Validation Study of Prostate Cancer Localization and Aggressiveness With a Quantitative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Approach. Invest Radiol 2020; 54:437-447. [PMID: 30946180 DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aims of this study were to assess the discriminative performance of quantitative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) between prostate cancer and noncancer tissues and between tumor grade groups (GGs) in a multicenter, single-vendor study, and to investigate to what extent site-specific differences affect variations in mpMRI parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS Fifty patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer from 5 institutions underwent a standardized preoperative mpMRI protocol. Based on the evaluation of whole-mount histopathology sections, regions of interest were placed on axial T2-weighed MRI scans in cancer and noncancer peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ) tissue. Regions of interest were transferred to functional parameter maps, and quantitative parameters were extracted. Across-center variations in noncancer tissues, differences between tissues, and the relation to cancer grade groups were assessed using linear mixed-effects models and receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS Variations in quantitative parameters were low across institutes (mean [maximum] proportion of total variance in PZ and TZ, 4% [14%] and 8% [46%], respectively). Cancer and noncancer tissues were best separated using the diffusion-weighted imaging-derived apparent diffusion coefficient, both in PZ and TZ (mean [95% confidence interval] areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUCs]; 0.93 [0.89-0.96] and 0.86 [0.75-0.94]), followed by MR spectroscopic imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced-derived parameters. Parameters from all imaging methods correlated significantly with tumor grade group in PZ tumors. In discriminating GG1 PZ tumors from higher GGs, the highest AUC was obtained with apparent diffusion coefficient (0.74 [0.57-0.90], P < 0.001). The best separation of GG1-2 from GG3-5 PZ tumors was with a logistic regression model of a combination of functional parameters (mean AUC, 0.89 [0.78-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS Standardized data acquisition and postprocessing protocols in prostate mpMRI at 3 T produce equivalent quantitative results across patients from multiple institutions and achieve similar discrimination between cancer and noncancer tissues and cancer grade groups as in previously reported single-center studies.
Collapse
|
34
|
Barrett T, Riemer F, McLean MA, Kaggie JD, Robb F, Warren AY, Graves MJ, Gallagher FA. Molecular imaging of the prostate: Comparing total sodium concentration quantification in prostate cancer and normal tissue using dedicated 13 C and 23 Na endorectal coils. J Magn Reson Imaging 2020; 51:90-97. [PMID: 31081564 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26788] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2019] [Accepted: 04/30/2019] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There has been recent interest in nonproton MRI including hyperpolarized carbon-13 (13 C) imaging. Prostate cancer has been shown to have a higher tissue sodium concentration (TSC) than normal tissue. Sodium (23 Na) and 13 C nuclei have a frequency difference of only 1.66 MHz at 3T, potentially enabling 23 Na imaging with a 13 C-tuned coil and maximizing the metabolic information obtained from a single study. PURPOSE To compare TSC measurements from a 13 C-tuned endorectal coil to those quantified with a dedicated 23 Na-tuned coil. STUDY TYPE Prospective. POPULATION Eight patients with biopsy-proven, intermediate/high risk prostate cancer imaged prior to prostatectomy. SEQUENCE 3T MRI with separate dual-tuned 1 H/23 Na and 1 H/13 C endorectal receive coils to quantify TSC. ASSESSMENT Regions-of-interest for TSC quantification were defined for normal peripheral zone (PZ), normal transition zone (TZ), and tumor, with reference to histopathology maps. STATISTICAL TESTS Two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum with additional measures of correlation, coefficient of variation, and Bland-Altman plots to assess for between-test differences. RESULTS Mean TSC for normal PZ and TZ were 39.2 and 33.9 mM, respectively, with the 23 Na coil and 40.1 and 36.3 mM, respectively, with the 13 C coil (P = 0.22 and P = 0.11 for the intercoil comparison, respectively). For tumor tissue, there was no statistical difference between the overall mean tumor TSC measured with the 23 Na coil (41.8 mM) and with the 13 C coil (46.6 mM; P = 0.38). Bland-Altman plots showed good repeatability for tumor TSC measurements between coils, with a reproducibility coefficient of 9 mM; the coefficient of variation between the coils was 12%. The Pearson correlation coefficient for TSC between coils for all measurements was r = 0.71 (r2 = 0.51), indicating a strong positive linear relationship. The mean TSC within PZ tumors was significantly higher compared with normal PZ for both the 23 Na coil (45.4 mM; P = 0.02) and the 13 C coil (49.4 mM; P = 0.002). DATA CONCLUSION We demonstrated the feasibility of using a carbon-tuned coil to quantify TSC, enabling dual metabolic information from a single coil. This approach could make the acquisition of both 23 Na-MRI and 13 C-MRI feasible in a single clinical imaging session. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:90-97.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan Barrett
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK
| | - Frank Riemer
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Joshua D Kaggie
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Anne Y Warren
- Department of Histopathology, Cambridge University Hospitals and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Martin J Graves
- Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ferdia A Gallagher
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Zheng S, Jiang S, Chen Z, Huang Z, Shi W, Liu B, Xu Y, Guo Y, Yang H, Li M. The roles of MRI-based prostate volume and associated zone-adjusted prostate-specific antigen concentrations in predicting prostate cancer and high-risk prostate cancer. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0218645. [PMID: 31743339 PMCID: PMC6863612 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2019] [Accepted: 10/29/2019] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Prostate biopsies are frequently performed to screen for prostate cancer (PCa) with complications such as infections and bleeding. To reduce unnecessary biopsies, here we designed an improved predictive model of MRI-based prostate volume and associated zone-adjusted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations for diagnosing PCa and risk stratification. Multiparametric MRI administered to 422 consecutive patients before initial transrectal ultrasonography-guided 13-core prostate biopsies from January 2012 to March 2018 at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses and determination of the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed to evaluate and integrate the predictors of PCa and high-risk prostate cancer (HR-PCa). The detection rates of PCa was 43.84% (185/422). And the detection rates of HR-PCa was 71.35% (132/185) in PCa patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that prostate volume(PV), PSA density(PSAD), transitional zone volume(TZV), PSA density of the transitional zone(PSADTZ), and MR were independent predictors of PCa and HR-PCa. PSA, peripheral zone volume(PZV) and PSA density of the peripheral zone(PSADPZ) were independent predictors of PCa but not HR-PCa. The AUC of our best predictive model including PSA + PV + PSAD + MR + TZV or PSA + PV + PSAD + MR + PZV was 0.906 for PCa. The AUC of the best predictive model of PV + PSAD + MR + TZV was 0.893 for HR-PCa. In conclusion, our results will likely improve the detection rate of prostate cancer, avoiding unnecessary prostate biopsies, and for evaluating risk stratification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Song Zheng
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Shaoqin Jiang
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Zhenlin Chen
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Zhangcheng Huang
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Wenzhen Shi
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Bingqiao Liu
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Yue Xu
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Yinan Guo
- Department of Nursing, Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Huijie Yang
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
| | - Mengqiang Li
- Laboratory of Urology, Department of Urology, Fujian Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Merisaari H, Taimen P, Shiradkar R, Ettala O, Pesola M, Saunavaara J, Boström PJ, Madabhushi A, Aronen HJ, Jambor I. Repeatability of radiomics and machine learning for DWI: Short-term repeatability study of 112 patients with prostate cancer. Magn Reson Med 2019; 83:2293-2309. [PMID: 31703155 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2019] [Revised: 10/03/2019] [Accepted: 10/09/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate repeatability of prostate DWI-derived radiomics and machine learning methods for prostate cancer (PCa) characterization. METHODS A total of 112 patients with diagnosed PCa underwent 2 prostate MRI examinations (Scan1 and Scan2) performed on the same day. DWI was performed using 12 b-values (0-2000 s/mm2 ), post-processed using kurtosis function, and PCa areas were annotated using whole mount prostatectomy sections. A total of 1694 radiomic features including Sobel, Kirch, Gradient, Zernike Moments, Gabor, Haralick, CoLIAGe, Haar wavelet coefficients, 3D analogue to Laws features, 2D contours, and corner detectors were calculated. Radiomics and 4 feature pruning methods (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, maximum relevance minimum redundancy, Spearman's ρ, Wilcoxon rank-sum) were evaluated in terms of Scan1-Scan2 repeatability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)(3,1). Classification performance for clinically significant and insignificant PCa with Gleason grade groups 1 versus >1 was evaluated by area under the receiver operator characteristic curve in unseen random 30% data split. RESULTS The ICC(3,1) values for conventional radiomics and feature pruning methods were in the range of 0.28-0.90. The machine learning classifications varied between Scan1 and Scan2 with % of same class labels between Scan1 and Scan2 in the range of 61-81%. Surface-to-volume ratio and corner detector-based features were among the most represented features with high repeatability, ICC(3,1) >0.75, consistently high ranking using all 4 feature pruning methods, and classification performance with area under the receiver operator characteristic curve >0.70. CONCLUSION Surface-to-volume ratio and corner detectors for prostate DWI led to good classification of unseen data and performed similarly in Scan1 and Scan2 in contrast to multiple conventional radiomic features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harri Merisaari
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.,Department of Future Technologies, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Pekka Taimen
- Institute of Biomedicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.,Department of Pathology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Rakesh Shiradkar
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Otto Ettala
- Department of Urology, University of Turku and Turku University hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Marko Pesola
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
| | - Jani Saunavaara
- Medical Imaging Centre of Southwest Finland, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Peter J Boström
- Department of Urology, University of Turku and Turku University hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Anant Madabhushi
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Hannu J Aronen
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.,Medical Imaging Centre of Southwest Finland, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
| | - Ivan Jambor
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.,Department of Radiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Evans VS, Torrealdea F, Rega M, Brizmohun Appayya M, Latifoltojar A, Sidhu H, Kim M, Kujawa A, Punwani S, Golay X, Atkinson D. Optimization and repeatability of multipool chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI of the prostate at 3.0 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019; 50:1238-1250. [PMID: 30770603 PMCID: PMC6767527 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2018] [Revised: 02/06/2019] [Accepted: 02/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) can potentially support cancer imaging with metabolically derived information. Multiparametric prostate MRI has improved diagnosis but may benefit from additional information to reduce the need for biopsies. PURPOSE To optimize an acquisition and postprocessing protocol for 3.0 T multipool CEST analysis of prostate data and evaluate the repeatability of the technique. STUDY TYPE Prospective. SUBJECTS Five healthy volunteers (age range: 24-47 years; median age: 28 years) underwent two sessions (interval range: 7-27 days; median interval: 20 days) and two biopsy-proven prostate cancer patients were evaluated once. Patient 1 (71 years) had a Gleason 3 + 4 transition zone (TZ) tumor and patient 2 (55 years) had a Gleason 4 + 3 peripheral zone (PZ) tumor. FIELD STRENGTH 3.0 T. Sequences run: T2 -weighted turbo-spin-echo (TSE); diffusion-weighted imaging; CEST; WASABI (for B0 determination). ASSESSMENT Saturation, readout, and fit-model parameters were optimized to maximize in vivo amide and nuclear Overhauser effect (NOE) signals. Repeatability (intrasession and intersession) was evaluated in healthy volunteers. Subsequently, preliminary evaluation of signal differences was made in patients. Regions of interest were drawn by two post-FRCR board-certified readers, both with over 5 years of experience in multiparametric prostate MRI. STATISTICAL TESTS Repeatability was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, coefficient of variation (CV), and 95% limits of agreement (LOA). Statistical significance of CEST contrast was calculated using a nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS The optimized saturation scheme was found to be 60 sinc-Gaussian pulses with 40 msec pulse duration, at 50% duty-cycle with continuous-wave pulse equivalent B1 power (B1CWPE ) of 0.92 μT. The magnetization transfer (MT) contribution to the fit-model was centered at -1.27 ppm. Intersession coefficients of variation (CVs) of the amide, NOE, and magnetization transfer (MT) and asymmetric magnetization transfer ratio (MTRasym ) signals of 25%, 23%, 18%, and 200%, respectively, were observed. Fit-metric and MTRasym CVs agreed between readers to within 4 and 10 percentage points, respectively. DATA CONCLUSION Signal differences of 0.03-0.10 (17-43%) detectable depending upon pool, with MT the most repeatable (signal difference of 17-22% detectable). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1238-1250.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Marilena Rega
- Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, University College HospitalLondonUK
| | | | | | - Harbir Sidhu
- Centre for Medical ImagingUniversity College LondonLondonUK
- Radiology DepartmentUniversity College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, University College HospitalLondonUK
| | - Mina Kim
- Institute of NeurologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Aaron Kujawa
- Institute of NeurologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Centre for Medical ImagingUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Xavier Golay
- Institute of NeurologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - David Atkinson
- Centre for Medical ImagingUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Peled S, Vangel M, Kikinis R, Tempany CM, Fennessy FM, Fedorov A. Selection of Fitting Model and Arterial Input Function for Repeatability in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Prostate MRI. Acad Radiol 2019; 26:e241-e251. [PMID: 30467073 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.10.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2018] [Revised: 10/19/2018] [Accepted: 10/21/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging is notable for the variability of calculated parameters. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of measurement variability and error/variability due to modeling in DCE magnetic resonance imaging parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two prostate DCE scans were performed on 11 treatment-naïve patients with suspected or confirmed prostate peripheral zone cancer within an interval of less than two weeks. Tumor-suspicious and normal-appearing regions of interest (ROI) in the prostate peripheral zone were segmented. Different Tofts-Kety based models and different arterial input functions, with and without bolus arrival time (BAT) correction, were used to extract pharmacokinetic parameters. The percent repeatability coefficient (%RC) of fitted model parameters Ktrans, ve, and kep was calculated. Paired t-tests comparing parameters in tumor-suspicious ROIs and in normal-appearing tissue evaluated each parameter's sensitivity to pathology. RESULTS Although goodness-of-fit criteria favored the four-parameter extended Tofts-Kety model with the BAT correction included, the simplest two-parameter Tofts-Kety model overall yielded the best repeatability scores. The best %RC in the tumor-suspicious ROI was 63% for kep, 28% for ve, and 83% for Ktrans . The best p values for discrimination between tissues were p <10-5 for kep and Ktrans, and p = 0.11 for ve. Addition of the BAT correction to the models did not improve repeatability. CONCLUSION The parameter kep, using an arterial input functions directly measured from blood signals, was more repeatable than Ktrans. Both Ktrans and kep values were highly discriminatory between healthy and diseased tissues in all cases. The parameter ve had high repeatability but could not distinguish the two tissue types.
Collapse
|
39
|
Schwier M, van Griethuysen J, Vangel MG, Pieper S, Peled S, Tempany C, Aerts HJWL, Kikinis R, Fennessy FM, Fedorov A. Repeatability of Multiparametric Prostate MRI Radiomics Features. Sci Rep 2019; 9:9441. [PMID: 31263116 PMCID: PMC6602944 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-45766-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 152] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2018] [Accepted: 06/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
In this study we assessed the repeatability of radiomics features on small prostate tumors using test-retest Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI). The premise of radiomics is that quantitative image-based features can serve as biomarkers for detecting and characterizing disease. For such biomarkers to be useful, repeatability is a basic requirement, meaning its value must remain stable between two scans, if the conditions remain stable. We investigated repeatability of radiomics features under various preprocessing and extraction configurations including various image normalization schemes, different image pre-filtering, and different bin widths for image discretization. Although we found many radiomics features and preprocessing combinations with high repeatability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient > 0.85), our results indicate that overall the repeatability is highly sensitive to the processing parameters. Neither image normalization, using a variety of approaches, nor the use of pre-filtering options resulted in consistent improvements in repeatability. We urge caution when interpreting radiomics features and advise paying close attention to the processing configuration details of reported results. Furthermore, we advocate reporting all processing details in radiomics studies and strongly recommend the use of open source implementations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Schwier
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Mark G Vangel
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA
| | | | - Sharon Peled
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Clare Tempany
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Hugo J W L Aerts
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ron Kikinis
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Fraunhofer MEVIS, Bremen, Germany
- Mathematics/Computer Science Faculty, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - Fiona M Fennessy
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Andriy Fedorov
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Johnston EW, Bonet-Carne E, Ferizi U, Yvernault B, Pye H, Patel D, Clemente J, Piga W, Heavey S, Sidhu HS, Giganti F, O’Callaghan J, Brizmohun Appayya M, Grey A, Saborowska A, Ourselin S, Hawkes D, Moore CM, Emberton M, Ahmed HU, Whitaker H, Rodriguez-Justo M, Freeman A, Atkinson D, Alexander D, Panagiotaki E, Punwani S. VERDICT MRI for Prostate Cancer: Intracellular Volume Fraction versus Apparent Diffusion Coefficient. Radiology 2019; 291:391-397. [PMID: 30938627 PMCID: PMC6493214 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019181749] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2018] [Revised: 01/25/2019] [Accepted: 01/30/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Background Biologic specificity of diffusion MRI in relation to prostate cancer aggressiveness may improve by examining separate components of the diffusion MRI signal. The Vascular, Extracellular, and Restricted Diffusion for Cytometry in Tumors (VERDICT) model estimates three distinct signal components and associates them to (a) intracellular water, (b) water in the extracellular extravascular space, and (c) water in the microvasculature. Purpose To evaluate the repeatability, image quality, and diagnostic utility of intracellular volume fraction (FIC) maps obtained with VERDICT prostate MRI and to compare those maps with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps for Gleason grade differentiation. Materials and Methods Seventy men (median age, 62.2 years; range, 49.5-82.0 years) suspected of having prostate cancer or undergoing active surveillance were recruited to a prospective study between April 2016 and October 2017. All men underwent multiparametric prostate and VERDICT MRI. Forty-two of the 70 men (median age, 67.7 years; range, 50.0-82.0 years) underwent two VERDICT MRI acquisitions to assess repeatability of FIC measurements obtained with VERDICT MRI. Repeatability was measured with use of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The image quality of FIC and ADC maps was independently evaluated by two board-certified radiologists. Forty-two men (median age, 64.8 years; range, 49.5-79.6 years) underwent targeted biopsy, which enabled comparison of FIC and ADC metrics in the differentiation between Gleason grades. Results VERDICT MRI FIC demonstrated ICCs of 0.87-0.95. There was no significant difference between image quality of ADC and FIC maps (score, 3.1 vs 3.3, respectively; P = .90). FIC was higher in lesions with a Gleason grade of at least 3+4 compared with benign and/or Gleason grade 3+3 lesions (mean, 0.49 ± 0.17 vs 0.31 ± 0.12, respectively; P = .002). The difference in ADC between these groups did not reach statistical significance (mean, 1.42 vs 1.16 × 10-3 mm2/sec; P = .26). Conclusion Fractional intracellular volume demonstrates high repeatability and image quality and enables better differentiation of a Gleason 4 component cancer from benign and/or Gleason 3+3 histology than apparent diffusion coefficient. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Sigmund and Rosenkrantz in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward W. Johnston
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Elisenda Bonet-Carne
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Uran Ferizi
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Ben Yvernault
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Hayley Pye
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Dominic Patel
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Joey Clemente
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Wivijin Piga
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Susan Heavey
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Harbir S. Sidhu
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Francesco Giganti
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - James O’Callaghan
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Mrishta Brizmohun Appayya
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Alistair Grey
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Alexandra Saborowska
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Sebastien Ourselin
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - David Hawkes
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Caroline M. Moore
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Mark Emberton
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Hashim U. Ahmed
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Hayley Whitaker
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Manuel Rodriguez-Justo
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Alexander Freeman
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - David Atkinson
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Daniel Alexander
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Eleftheria Panagiotaki
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| | - Shonit Punwani
- From the UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London,
2nd Floor Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TS, England
(E.W.J., E.B.C., H.S.S., J.O., M.B.A., D. Atkinson, S.P.); UCL Centre for
Medical Image Computing, London, England (E.B.C., U.F., B.Y., S.O., D.H., D.
Alexander, E.P.); UCL Centre for Molecular Intervention, London, England (H.P.,
S.H., H.W.); Department of Histopathology, University College Hospital, London,
England (D.P., M.R.J., A.F.); Department of Radiology (J.C.) and Centre for
Medical Imaging (J.C., W.P., A.S.), University College Hospital, London,
England; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Faculty of Medical
Sciences, University College London, London, England (F.G., A.G., C.M.M., M.E.);
and Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England
(H.U.A.)
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Onodera K, Hatakenaka M, Yama N, Onodera M, Saito T, Kwee TC, Takahara T. Repeatability analysis of ADC histogram metrics of the uterus. Acta Radiol 2019; 60:526-534. [PMID: 29969050 DOI: 10.1177/0284185118786062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recently, histogram analysis based on voxel-wise apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value distribution has been increasingly performed. However, few studies have been reported regarding its repeatability. PURPOSE To evaluate the repeatability of ADC histogram metrics of the uterus in clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty-three female patients who underwent pelvic MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) were prospectively included after providing informed consent. Two sequential DWI acquisitions with identical parameters and position were obtained. Regions of interest (ROIs) for histologically confirmed uterine lesions (five cervical and three endometrial cancers, and one endometrial hyperplasia) and normal appearing tissues (21 endometrium and 33 myometrium) were assigned on the first DWI dataset and then pasted onto the second DWI dataset. ADC histogram metrics within the ROIs were calculated and repeatability was evaluated by calculating within-subject coefficient of variance (%) (wCV (%)) and Bland-Altman plot (%). RESULTS ADC 10%, 25%, median, 75%, 90%, maximum, mean, and entropy showed high repeatability (wCV (%) < 7, 95% limit of agreement in Bland-Altman plot (%) < ±20), followed by ADC minimum (wCV (%) = 8.12, 95% limit of agreement in Bland-Altman plot (%) < ±30). However, ADC skewness and kurtosis showed very low repeatability in all evaluations. CONCLUSION ADC histogram metrics like ADC 10%, 25%, median, 75%, 90%, maximum, mean, and entropy are robust biomarkers and could be applicable to clinical use. However, ADC skewness and kurtosis lack robustness. Radiologists should keep these characteristics and limitations in mind when interpreting quantitative DWI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koichi Onodera
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan
| | | | - Naoya Yama
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Maki Onodera
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Tsuyoshi Saito
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Thomas Christian Kwee
- Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Taro Takahara
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Engineering, Tokai University, Hiratsuka, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Hulsen T. An overview of publicly available patient-centered prostate cancer datasets. Transl Androl Urol 2019; 8:S64-S77. [PMID: 31143673 PMCID: PMC6511704 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.03.01] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2018] [Accepted: 02/27/2019] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men, and the second leading cause of death from cancer in men. Many studies on PCa have been carried out, each taking much time before the data is collected and ready to be analyzed. However, on the internet there is already a wide range of PCa datasets available, which could be used for data mining, predictive modelling or other purposes, reducing the need to setup new studies to collect data. In the current scientific climate, moving more and more to the analysis of "big data" and large, international, multi-site projects using a modern IT infrastructure, these datasets could be proven extremely valuable. This review presents an overview of publicly available patient-centered PCa datasets, divided into three categories (clinical, genomics and imaging) and an "overall" section to enable researchers to select a suitable dataset for analysis, without having to go through days of work to find the right data. To acquire a list of human PCa databases, scientific literature databases and academic social network sites were searched. We also used the information from other reviews. All databases in the combined list were then checked for public availability. Only databases that were either directly publicly available or available after signing a research data agreement or retrieving a free login were selected for inclusion in this review. Data should be available to commercial parties as well. This paper focuses on patient-centered data, so the genomics data section does not include gene-centered databases or pathway-centered databases. We identified 42 publicly available, patient-centered PCa datasets. Some of these consist of different smaller datasets. Some of them contain combinations of datasets from the three data domains: clinical data, imaging data and genomics data. Only one dataset contains information from all three domains. This review presents all datasets and their characteristics: number of subjects, clinical fields, imaging modalities, expression data, mutation data, biomarker measurements, etc. Despite all the attention that has been given to making this overview of publicly available databases as extensive as possible, it is very likely not complete, and will also be outdated soon. However, this review might help many PCa researchers to find suitable datasets to answer the research question with, without the need to start a new data collection project. In the coming era of big data analysis, overviews like this are becoming more and more useful.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tim Hulsen
- Department of Professional Health Solutions & Services, Philips Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Barrett T, Lawrence EM, Priest AN, Warren AY, Gnanapragasam VJ, Gallagher FA, Sala E. Repeatability of diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate using whole lesion ADC values, skew and histogram analysis. Eur J Radiol 2019; 110:22-29. [PMID: 30599864 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.11.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2018] [Revised: 11/13/2018] [Accepted: 11/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the repeatability of diffusion-weighted imaging parameter including ADC-derived histogram values in prostate cancer. METHODS 10 patients with prostate cancer were prospectively recruited to a retest cohort. 3 T diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate was acquired consecutively with patient getting off the scanner between studies. Prostatectomy-histopathology defined tumour regions-of-interest were outlined on ADC maps and diffusion-weighted metrics including histograms were calculated. The coefficient of reproducibility (CoR) and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess repeatability. RESULTS 10th centile, 90th centile, and median ADC showed good repeatability with mean difference ranging from -0.005 to -0.025 × 103 mm2s-1, and CoR ranging from 0.271-0.294 × 103 mm2s-1 of scan 1 mean). Two measures of heterogeneity and simplified texture, IQR and mean local range, had only moderate repeatability. IQR had a mean difference of -0.032 × 103 mm2s-1 between scans with CoR 0.181 × 103 mm2s-1 (56% of scan 1 mean). Mean local range had a mean difference -0.008 × 103 mm2s-1 between scans (37% of scan 1 mean). Bland-Altman plots showed good repeatability for test and re-test analysis for median, percentile and mean range values. All ADC values had good reliability regardless of whether the tumour border was included in quantitative analysis. ADC histogram skew had poor repeatability, CoR 0.78 × 103 mm2s-1 (373% of scan 1 mean). CONCLUSION 10th and 90th centile ADC demonstrated sufficient repeatability for clinical use. However, more advanced measures of heterogeneity such as histogram skew, IQR, or mean local range may be limited by their repeatability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan Barrett
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK; CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
| | - Edward M Lawrence
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Andrew N Priest
- Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Anne Y Warren
- CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Histopathology, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Vincent J Gnanapragasam
- CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Urology, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ferdia A Gallagher
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Evis Sala
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Fedorov A, Schwier M, Clunie D, Herz C, Pieper S, Kikinis R, Tempany C, Fennessy F. An annotated test-retest collection of prostate multiparametric MRI. Sci Data 2018; 5:180281. [PMID: 30512014 PMCID: PMC6278692 DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2018.281] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2018] [Accepted: 10/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) is widely used for characterizing prostate cancer. Standard of care use of mpMRI in clinic relies on visual interpretation of the images by an expert. mpMRI is also increasingly used as a quantitative imaging biomarker of the disease. Little is known about repeatability of such quantitative measurements, and no test-retest datasets have been available publicly to support investigation of the technical characteristics of the MRI-based quantification in the prostate. Here we present an mpMRI dataset consisting of baseline and repeat prostate MRI exams for 15 subjects, manually annotated to define regions corresponding to lesions and anatomical structures, and accompanied by region-based measurements. This dataset aims to support further investigation of the repeatability of mpMRI-derived quantitative prostate measurements, study of the robustness and reliability of the automated analysis approaches, and to support development and validation of new image analysis techniques. The manuscript can also serve as an example of the use of DICOM for standardized encoding of the image annotation and quantification results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andriy Fedorov
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Michael Schwier
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Christian Herz
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Ron Kikinis
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Fraunhofer MEVIS, Bremen, Germany
- Mathematics/Computer Science Faculty, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - Clare Tempany
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Fiona Fennessy
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Caglic I, Barrett T. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in lymph node staging for prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol 2018; 7:814-823. [PMID: 30456184 PMCID: PMC6212625 DOI: 10.21037/tau.2018.08.04] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
In patients with prostate cancer, the presence of lymph node (LN) metastases is a critical prognostic factor and is essential for treatment planning. Conventional cross-sectional imaging performs poorly for nodal staging as both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are mainly dependent on size and basic morphological criteria. Therefore, extended pelvic LN dissection (ePLND) remains the gold standard for LN staging, however, it is an invasive procedure with its own drawbacks, thus creating a need for accurate preoperative imaging test. Incorporating functional MRI by using diffusion-weighted MRI has proven superior to conventional MRI protocol by means of both qualitative and quantitative assessment. Currently, the increased diagnostic performance remains insufficient to replace ePLND and the future role of DWI may be through combination with MR lymphangiography or with novel positron emission tomography (PET) tracers. In this article, the current state of data supporting DWI in LN staging of patients with prostate cancer is discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iztok Caglic
- Department of Radiology, Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
| | - Tristan Barrett
- Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.,CamPARI Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Ayat N, Qin JC, Cheng H, Roelle S, Gao S, Li Y, Lu ZR. Optimization of ZD2 Peptide Targeted Gd(HP-DO3A) for Detection and Risk-Stratification of Prostate Cancer with MRI. ACS Med Chem Lett 2018; 9:730-735. [PMID: 30034609 PMCID: PMC6047029 DOI: 10.1021/acsmedchemlett.8b00172] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2018] [Accepted: 06/06/2018] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
The aim of this work is to optimize a peptide targeted macrocyclic MRI contrast agent for detection and risk-stratification of aggressive prostate cancer. The optimized agent was prepared using click chemistry in the presence of CuSO4 and ascorbate at room temperature. The T1 and T2 relaxivities of ZD2-N3-Gd(HP-DO3A) are 5.44 and 7.10 mM-1 s-1 at 1.4 T, and 5.53 and 7.81 mM-1 s-1 at 7 T, respectively, higher than the previously reported ZD2-Gd(HP-DO3A). The specific tumor enhancement of the agent was investigated in male nude mice bearing aggressive PC3 human prostate cancer xenografts and slow-growing LNCaP tumor xenografts. Contrast enhanced MR images were acquired using a 2D spin-echo sequence and a 3D FLASH sequence with a 7 T small animal scanner. ZD2-N3-Gd(HP-DO3A) produced robust contrast enhancement in aggressive PC3 tumors and little enhancement in slow-growing LNCaP tumors. It produced 400% and 100% CNR increases in the T1-weighted 2D spin-echo MR images and 3D FLASH images of PC3 tumors, respectively, for at least 30 min at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. In contrast, less than 20% CNR increase was observed in the LNCaP tumors with both sequences. The optimized targeted contrast agent has higher relaxivities and are effective to detect aggressive PC3 tumors and differentiate the aggressive cancer from the slow-growing LNCaP prostate cancer in contrast enhanced MRI. ZD2-N3-Gd(HP-DO3A) has the promise for accurate detection and risk-stratification of aggressive prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadia
R. Ayat
- Case
Center for Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering,
School of Engineering, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, United States
| | - Jing-Can Qin
- Case
Center for Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering,
School of Engineering, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, United States
| | - Han Cheng
- Case
Center for Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering,
School of Engineering, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, United States
| | - Sarah Roelle
- Case
Center for Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering,
School of Engineering, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, United States
| | - Songqi Gao
- Case
Center for Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering,
School of Engineering, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, United States
- Molecular
Theranostics, Cleveland, Ohio 44115, United
States
| | - Yajuan Li
- Molecular
Theranostics, Cleveland, Ohio 44115, United
States
| | - Zheng-Rong Lu
- Case
Center for Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering,
School of Engineering, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, United States
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Gaur S, Harmon S, Rosenblum L, Greer MD, Mehralivand S, Coskun M, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Shih JH, Pinto PA, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Can Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values Assist PI-RADS Version 2 DWI Scoring? A Correlation Study Using the PI-RADSv2 and International Society of Urological Pathology Systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 211:W33-W41. [PMID: 29733695 PMCID: PMC7984719 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.17.18702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purposes of this study were to assess correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and normalized ADC (ratio of tumor to nontumor tissue) with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) and updated International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) categories and to determine how to optimally use ADC metrics for objective assistance in categorizing lesions within PI-RADSv2 guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this retrospective study, 100 patients (median age, 62 years; range, 44-75 years; prostate-specific antigen level, 7.18 ng/mL; range, 1.70-84.56 ng/mL) underwent 3-T multiparametric MRI of the prostate with an endorectal coil. Mean ADC was extracted from ROIs based on subsequent prostatectomy specimens. Histopathologic analysis revealed 172 lesions (113 peripheral, 59 transition zone). Two radiologists blinded to histopathologic outcome assigned PI-RADSv2 categories. Kendall tau was used to correlate ADC metrics with PI-RADSv2 and ISUP categories. ROC curves were used to assess the utility of ADC metrics in differentiating each reader's PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5 assessment in the whole prostate and by zone. RESULTS ADC metrics negatively correlated with ISUP category in the whole prostate (ADC, τ = -0.21, p = 0.0002; normalized ADC, τ = -0.21, p = 0.0001). Moderate negative correlation was found in expert PI-RADSv2 DWI categories (ADC, τ = -0.34; normalized ADC, τ = -0.31; each p < 0.0001) maintained across zones. In the whole prostate, AUCs of ADC and normalized ADC were 87% and 82% for predicting expert PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5. A derived optimal cutoff ADC less than 1061 and normalized ADC less than 0.65 achieved positive predictive values of 83% and 84% for correct classification of PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5 by an expert reader. Consistent relations and predictive values were found by an independent novice reader. CONCLUSION ADC and normalized ADC inversely correlate with PI-RADSv2 and ISUP categories and can serve as quantitative metrics to assist with assigning PI-RADSv2 DWI category 4 or 5.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonia Gaur
- 1 Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20814
| | - Stephanie Harmon
- 2 Clinical Research Directorate, Clinical Monitoring Research Program, Leidos Biomedical Research, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, MD
| | - Lauren Rosenblum
- 1 Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20814
| | - Matthew D Greer
- 1 Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20814
| | - Sherif Mehralivand
- 3 Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Mehmet Coskun
- 4 İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Atatürk Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey
| | - Maria J Merino
- 1 Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20814
| | - Bradford J Wood
- 5 Center for Interventional Oncology, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Joanna H Shih
- 6 Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD
| | - Peter A Pinto
- 3 Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L Choyke
- 1 Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20814
| | - Baris Turkbey
- 1 Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Rm B3B85, Bethesda, MD 20814
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Lee CH, Ku JY, Park WY, Lee NK, Ha HK. Comparison of the accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) results with the final pathology findings for radical prostatectomy specimens in the detection of prostate cancer. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2018; 15:e20-e27. [PMID: 29920966 DOI: 10.1111/ajco.13027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2018] [Accepted: 05/19/2018] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
AIMS To assess the accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), used in conjunction with the Prostrate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), version 2, in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa), and to determine the extent of the efficacy of mpMRI as a screening test in biopsy-naïve patients. METHODS Retrospective analysis was conducted in 107 patients who underwent mpMRI prior to radical prostatectomy (RP) at a single institution. The mpMRI findings were reassessed using PI-RADS, version 2. A comparison was made between the histological findings for the RP specimens and the mpMRI results. RESULTS Unique histologically confirmed PCa foci (237) were identified in 107 patients. Overall, mpMRI sensitivity of 46% was found for PCa detection (110/237). The sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value of mpMRI was 75.5%, 77.0% and 79.8%, respectively, for clinically significant cancer, and 75.7%, 77.7% and 79.5%, for pathological index tumors. A moderate and significant correlation was observed between a high PI-RADS score and a high pathological grade, tumor volume, index tumor status and clinically significant cancer status (all, P < 0.001, respectively). Pathological tumor volume was a significant predictor of PCa detection using mpMRI according to multivariate analysis. Using a cut-off value of 0.89 cc, the sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI for PCa detection were 0.87 and 0.65, respectively. CONCLUSION The mpMRI, used in conjunction with PI-RADS, was useful in detecting PCa and in predicting tumor aggressiveness. However, the detection of 20% of clinically significant cancer was missed using mpMRI. Thus, its inclusion in a triage test should be limited to selected biopsy-naïve patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chan Ho Lee
- Department of Urology, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
| | - Ja Yoon Ku
- Department of Urology, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
| | - Won Young Park
- Department of Pathology, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
| | - Nam Kyung Lee
- Department of Radiology, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
| | - Hong Koo Ha
- Department of Urology, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea.,Pusan National University School of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute, Busan, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Domachevsky L, Goldberg N, Bernstine H, Nidam M, Groshar D. Quantitative characterisation of clinically significant intra-prostatic cancer by prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression and cell density on PSMA-11. Eur Radiol 2018; 28:5275-5283. [PMID: 29846803 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5484-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2017] [Revised: 03/26/2018] [Accepted: 04/12/2018] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To quantitatively characterize clinically significant intra-prostatic cancer (IPC) by prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression and cell density on PSMA-11 positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR). METHODS Retrospective study approved by the institutional review board with informed written consent obtained. Patients with a solitary, biopsy-proven prostate cancer, Gleason score (GS) ≥7, presenting for initial evaluation by PET/computerised tomography (PET/CT), underwent early prostate PET/MR immediately after PSMA-11 tracer injection. PET/MR [MRI-based attenuation correction (MRAC)] and PET/CT [CT-based AC (CTAC)] maximal standardised uptake value (SUVmax) and minimal and mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmin, ADCmean; respectively) in normal prostatic tissue (NPT) were compared to IPC area. The relationship between SUVmax, ADCmin and ADCmean measurements was obtained. RESULTS Twenty-two patients (mean age 69.5±5.0 years) were included in the analysis. Forty-four prostate areas were evaluated (22 IPC and 22 NPT). Median MRAC SUVmax of NPT was significantly lower than median MRAC SUVmax of IPC (p < 0.0001). Median ADCmin and ADCmean of NPT was significantly higher than median ADCmin and ADCmean of IPC (p < 0.0001). A very good correlation was found between MRAC SUVmax with CTAC SUVmax (rho = -0.843, p < 0.0001). A good inverse relationship was found between MRAC SUVmax and CTAC SUVmax with ADCmin (rho = -0.717, p < 0.0001 and -0.740, p < 0.0001; respectively; Z = 0.22, p = 0.82, NS) and with MRAC SUVmax and ADCmean (rho = -0.737, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS PET/MR SUVmax, ADCmin and ADCmean are distinct biomarkers able to differentiate between IPC and NPT in naïve prostate cancer patients with GS ≥ 7. KEY POINTS • PSMA PET/MR metrics differentiate between normal and tumoural prostatic tissue. • A multi-parametric approach combining molecular and anatomical information might direct prostate biopsy. • PSMA PET/MR metrics are warranted for radiomics analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liran Domachevsky
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel St, 6971028, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
| | - Natalia Goldberg
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel St, 6971028, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - Hanna Bernstine
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel St, 6971028, Tel-Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Meital Nidam
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel St, 6971028, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - David Groshar
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel St, 6971028, Tel-Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Hassanzadeh E, Alessandrino F, Olubiyi OI, Glazer DI, Mulkern RV, Fedorov A, Tempany CM, Fennessy FM. Comparison of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient parameters with prostate imaging reporting and data system V2 assessment for detection of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018; 43:1237-1244. [PMID: 28840280 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1297-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare diagnostic performance of PI-RADSv2 with ADC parameters to identify clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) and to determine the impact of csPC definitions on diagnostic performance of ADC and PI-RADSv2. METHODS We retrospectively identified treatment-naïve pathology-proven peripheral zone PC patients who underwent 3T prostate MRI, using high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging from 2011 to 2015. Using 3D slicer, areas of suspected tumor (T) and normal tissue (N) on ADC (b = 0, 1400) were outlined volumetrically. Mean ADCT, mean ADCN, ADCratio (ADCT/ADCN) were calculated. PI-RADSv2 was assigned. Three csPC definitions were used: (A) Gleason score (GS) ≥ 4 + 3; (B) GS ≥ 3 + 4; (C) MRI-based tumor volume >0.5 cc. Performances of ADC parameters and PI-RADSv2 in identifying csPC were measured using nonparametric comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves using the area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS Eighty five cases met eligibility requirements. Diagnostic performances (AUC) in identifying csPC using three definitions were: (A) ADCT (0.83) was higher than PI-RADSv2 (0.65, p = 0.006); (B) ADCT (0.86) was higher than ADCratio (0.68, p < 0.001), and PI-RADSv2 (0.70, p = 0.04); (C) PI-RADSv2 (0.73) performed better than ADCratio (0.56, p = 0.02). ADCT performance was higher when csPC was defined by A or B versus C (p = 0.038 and p = 0.01, respectively). ADCratio performed better when csPC was defined by A versus C (p = 0.01). PI-RADSv2 performance was not affected by csPC definition. CONCLUSIONS When csPC was defined by GS, ADC parameters provided better csPC discrimination than PI-RADSv2, with ADCT providing best result. When csPC was defined by MRI-calculated volume, PI-RADSv2 provided better discrimination than ADCratio. csPC definition did not affect PI-RADSv2 diagnostic performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elmira Hassanzadeh
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1200 W Harrison St, Chicago, IL, 60607, USA
| | - Francesco Alessandrino
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
- Department of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Olutayo I Olubiyi
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
- Department of Radiology, Mercy Catholic Medical Center, 1500 Lansdowne Avenue, Darby, PA, USA
| | - Daniel I Glazer
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Robert V Mulkern
- Department of Radiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 300 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Andriy Fedorov
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Clare M Tempany
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Fiona M Fennessy
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
- Department of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|