1
|
Gao C, Landman BA, Prince JL, Carass A. Reproducibility evaluation of the effects of MRI defacing on brain segmentation. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) 2023; 10:064001. [PMID: 38074632 PMCID: PMC10704191 DOI: 10.1117/1.jmi.10.6.064001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2023] [Revised: 09/22/2023] [Accepted: 10/24/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Recent advances in magnetic resonance (MR) scanner quality and the rapidly improving nature of facial recognition software have necessitated the introduction of MR defacing algorithms to protect patient privacy. As a result, there are a number of MR defacing algorithms available to the neuroimaging community, with several appearing in just the last 5 years. While some qualities of these defacing algorithms, such as patient identifiability, have been explored in the previous works, the potential impact of defacing on neuroimage processing has yet to be explored. Approach We qualitatively evaluate eight MR defacing algorithms on 179 subjects from the OASIS-3 cohort and 21 subjects from the Kirby-21 dataset. We also evaluate the effects of defacing on two neuroimaging pipelines-SLANT and FreeSurfer-by comparing the segmentation consistency between the original and defaced images. Results Defacing can alter brain segmentation and even lead to catastrophic failures, which are more frequent with some algorithms, such as Quickshear, MRI_Deface, and FSL_deface. Compared to FreeSurfer, SLANT is less affected by defacing. On outputs that pass the quality check, the effects of defacing are less pronounced than those of rescanning, as measured by the Dice similarity coefficient. Conclusions The effects of defacing are noticeable and should not be disregarded. Extra attention, in particular, should be paid to the possibility of catastrophic failures. It is crucial to adopt a robust defacing algorithm and perform a thorough quality check before releasing defaced datasets. To improve the reliability of analysis in scenarios involving defaced MRIs, it is encouraged to include multiple brain segmentation pipelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chenyu Gao
- Vanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
| | - Bennett A. Landman
- Vanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
| | - Jerry L. Prince
- The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| | - Aaron Carass
- The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gao C, Landman BA, Prince JL, Carass A. A reproducibility evaluation of the effects of MRI defacing on brain segmentation. medRxiv 2023:2023.05.15.23289995. [PMID: 37293070 PMCID: PMC10246049 DOI: 10.1101/2023.05.15.23289995] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
Purpose Recent advances in magnetic resonance (MR) scanner quality and the rapidly improving nature of facial recognition software have necessitated the introduction of MR defacing algorithms to protect patient privacy. As a result, there are a number of MR defacing algorithms available to the neuroimaging community, with several appearing in just the last five years. While some qualities of these defacing algorithms, such as patient identifiability, have been explored in previous works, the potential impact of defacing on neuroimage processing has yet to be explored. Approach We qualitatively evaluate eight MR defacing algorithms on 179 subjects from the OASIS-3 cohort and the 21 subjects from the Kirby-21 dataset. We also evaluate the effects of defacing on two neuroimaging pipelines-SLANT and FreeSurfer-by comparing the segmentation consistency between the original and defaced images. Results Defacing can alter brain segmentation and even lead to catastrophic failures, which are more frequent with some algorithms such as Quickshear, MRI_Deface, and FSL_deface. Compared to FreeSurfer, SLANT is less affected by defacing. On outputs that pass the quality check, the effects of defacing are less pronounced than those of rescanning, as measured by the Dice similarity coefficient. Conclusions The effects of defacing are noticeable and should not be disregarded. Extra attention, in particular, should be paid to the possibility of catastrophic failures. It is crucial to adopt a robust defacing algorithm and perform a thorough quality check before releasing defaced datasets. To improve the reliability of analysis in scenarios involving defaced MRIs, it's encouraged to include multiple brain segmentation pipelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chenyu Gao
- Vanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, Tennessee, 37235
| | - Bennett A. Landman
- Vanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, Tennessee, 37235
| | - Jerry L. Prince
- The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, 21218
| | - Aaron Carass
- The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, 21218
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sahlsten J, Wahid KA, Glerean E, Jaskari J, Naser MA, He R, Kann BH, Mäkitie A, Fuller CD, Kaski K. Segmentation stability of human head and neck cancer medical images for radiotherapy applications under de-identification conditions: Benchmarking data sharing and artificial intelligence use-cases. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1120392. [PMID: 36925936 PMCID: PMC10011442 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1120392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Demand for head and neck cancer (HNC) radiotherapy data in algorithmic development has prompted increased image dataset sharing. Medical images must comply with data protection requirements so that re-use is enabled without disclosing patient identifiers. Defacing, i.e., the removal of facial features from images, is often considered a reasonable compromise between data protection and re-usability for neuroimaging data. While defacing tools have been developed by the neuroimaging community, their acceptability for radiotherapy applications have not been explored. Therefore, this study systematically investigated the impact of available defacing algorithms on HNC organs at risk (OARs). Methods A publicly available dataset of magnetic resonance imaging scans for 55 HNC patients with eight segmented OARs (bilateral submandibular glands, parotid glands, level II neck lymph nodes, level III neck lymph nodes) was utilized. Eight publicly available defacing algorithms were investigated: afni_refacer, DeepDefacer, defacer, fsl_deface, mask_face, mri_deface, pydeface, and quickshear. Using a subset of scans where defacing succeeded (N=29), a 5-fold cross-validation 3D U-net based OAR auto-segmentation model was utilized to perform two main experiments: 1.) comparing original and defaced data for training when evaluated on original data; 2.) using original data for training and comparing the model evaluation on original and defaced data. Models were primarily assessed using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Results Most defacing methods were unable to produce any usable images for evaluation, while mask_face, fsl_deface, and pydeface were unable to remove the face for 29%, 18%, and 24% of subjects, respectively. When using the original data for evaluation, the composite OAR DSC was statistically higher (p ≤ 0.05) for the model trained with the original data with a DSC of 0.760 compared to the mask_face, fsl_deface, and pydeface models with DSCs of 0.742, 0.736, and 0.449, respectively. Moreover, the model trained with original data had decreased performance (p ≤ 0.05) when evaluated on the defaced data with DSCs of 0.673, 0.693, and 0.406 for mask_face, fsl_deface, and pydeface, respectively. Conclusion Defacing algorithms may have a significant impact on HNC OAR auto-segmentation model training and testing. This work highlights the need for further development of HNC-specific image anonymization methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaakko Sahlsten
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
| | - Kareem A. Wahid
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Enrico Glerean
- Department of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland
| | - Joel Jaskari
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
| | - Mohamed A. Naser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Renjie He
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Benjamin H. Kann
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Program, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Antti Mäkitie
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Clifton D. Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
- *Correspondence: Clifton D. Fuller, ; Kimmo Kaski,
| | - Kimmo Kaski
- Department of Computer Science, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland
- *Correspondence: Clifton D. Fuller, ; Kimmo Kaski,
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Theyers AE, Zamyadi M, O'Reilly M, Bartha R, Symons S, MacQueen GM, Hassel S, Lerch JP, Anagnostou E, Lam RW, Frey BN, Milev R, Müller DJ, Kennedy SH, Scott CJM, Strother SC, Arnott SR. Multisite Comparison of MRI Defacing Software Across Multiple Cohorts. Front Psychiatry 2021; 12:617997. [PMID: 33716819 PMCID: PMC7943842 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.617997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 02/03/2021] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
With improvements to both scan quality and facial recognition software, there is an increased risk of participants being identified by a 3D render of their structural neuroimaging scans, even when all other personal information has been removed. To prevent this, facial features should be removed before data are shared or openly released, but while there are several publicly available software algorithms to do this, there has been no comprehensive review of their accuracy within the general population. To address this, we tested multiple algorithms on 300 scans from three neuroscience research projects, funded in part by the Ontario Brain Institute, to cover a wide range of ages (3-85 years) and multiple patient cohorts. While skull stripping is more thorough at removing identifiable features, we focused mainly on defacing software, as skull stripping also removes potentially useful information, which may be required for future analyses. We tested six publicly available algorithms (afni_refacer, deepdefacer, mri_deface, mridefacer, pydeface, quickshear), with one skull stripper (FreeSurfer) included for comparison. Accuracy was measured through a pass/fail system with two criteria; one, that all facial features had been removed and two, that no brain tissue was removed in the process. A subset of defaced scans were also run through several preprocessing pipelines to ensure that none of the algorithms would alter the resulting outputs. We found that the success rates varied strongly between defacers, with afni_refacer (89%) and pydeface (83%) having the highest rates, overall. In both cases, the primary source of failure came from a single dataset that the defacer appeared to struggle with - the youngest cohort (3-20 years) for afni_refacer and the oldest (44-85 years) for pydeface, demonstrating that defacer performance not only depends on the data provided, but that this effect varies between algorithms. While there were some very minor differences between the preprocessing results for defaced and original scans, none of these were significant and were within the range of variation between using different NIfTI converters, or using raw DICOM files.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Athena E Theyers
- Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Mojdeh Zamyadi
- Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Robert Bartha
- Department of Medical Biophysics, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Sean Symons
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Glenda M MacQueen
- Department of Psychiatry, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Stefanie Hassel
- Department of Psychiatry, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Jason P Lerch
- Mouse Imaging Centre, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Evdokia Anagnostou
- Bloorview Research Institute, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Raymond W Lam
- Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Benicio N Frey
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.,Mood Disorders Program, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Roumen Milev
- Departments of Psychiatry and Psychology, Queen's University, Providence Care Hospital, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Daniel J Müller
- Molecular Brain Science, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Sidney H Kennedy
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, Krembil Research Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Keenan Research Centre for Biomedical Science, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Christopher J M Scott
- LC Campbell Cognitive Neurology Research Unit, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Heart & Stroke Foundation Centre for Stroke Recovery, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Brain Sciences Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Stephen C Strother
- Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Stephen R Arnott
- Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mattern H, Knoll M, Lüsebrink F, Speck O. Chemical shift-based prospective k-space anonymization. Magn Reson Med 2020; 85:962-969. [PMID: 32761655 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2020] [Revised: 06/16/2020] [Accepted: 07/10/2020] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Publicly available data provision is an essential part of open science. However, open data can conflict with data privacy and data protection regulations. Head scans are particularly vulnerable because the subject's face can be reconstructed from the acquired images. Although defacing can impede subject identification in reconstructed images, this approach is not applicable to k-space raw data. To address this challenge and allow defacing of raw data for publication, we present chemical shift-based prospective k-space anonymization (CHARISMA). METHODS In spin-warp imaging, fat shift occurs along the frequency-encoding direction. By placing an oil-filled mask onto the subject's face, the shifted fat signal can overlap with the face to deface k-space during the acquisition. The CHARISMA approach was tested for gradient-echo sequences in a single subject wearing the oil-filled mask at 7 T. Different fat shifts were compared by varying the readout bandwidth. Furthermore, intensity-based segmentation was used to test whether the images could be unmasked retrospectively. RESULTS To impede subject identification after retrospective unmasking, the signal of face and shifted oil should overlap. In this single-subject study, a shift of 3.3 mm to 4.9 mm resulted in the most efficient masking. Independent of CHARISMA, long TEs induce signal decay and dephasing, which impeded unmasking. CONCLUSION To our best knowledge, CHARISMA is the first prospective k-space defacing approach. With proper fat-shift direction and amplitude, this easy-to-build, low-cost solution impaired subject identification in gradient-echo data considerably. Further sequences will be tested with CHARISMA in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hendrik Mattern
- Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Martin Knoll
- Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Falk Lüsebrink
- Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.,Medicine and Digitalization, Department of Neurology, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Oliver Speck
- Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.,German Center for Neurodegenerative Disease, Magdeburg, Germany.,Center for Behavioral Brain Sciences, Magdeburg, Germany.,Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology, Magdeburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|