Back to Search Start Over

Repeat it without me: Crowdsourcing the T1 mapping common ground via the ISMRM reproducibility challenge.

Authors :
Boudreau, Mathieu
Karakuzu, Agah
Cohen‐Adad, Julien
Bozkurt, Ecem
Carr, Madeline
Castellaro, Marco
Concha, Luis
Doneva, Mariya
Dual, Seraina A.
Ensworth, Alex
Foias, Alexandru
Fortier, Véronique
Gabr, Refaat E.
Gilbert, Guillaume
Glide‐Hurst, Carri K.
Grech‐Sollars, Matthew
Hu, Siyuan
Jalnefjord, Oscar
Jovicich, Jorge
Keskin, Kübra
Source :
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine; Sep2024, Vol. 92 Issue 3, p1115-1127, 13p
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Purpose: T1 mapping is a widely used quantitative MRI technique, but its tissue‐specific values remain inconsistent across protocols, sites, and vendors. The ISMRM Reproducible Research and Quantitative MR study groups jointly launched a challenge to assess the reproducibility of a well‐established inversion‐recovery T1 mapping technique, using acquisition details from a seminal T1 mapping paper on a standardized phantom and in human brains. Methods: The challenge used the acquisition protocol from Barral et al. (2010). Researchers collected T1 mapping data on the ISMRM/NIST phantom and/or in human brains. Data submission, pipeline development, and analysis were conducted using open‐source platforms. Intersubmission and intrasubmission comparisons were performed. Results: Eighteen submissions (39 phantom and 56 human datasets) on scanners by three MRI vendors were collected at 3 T (except one, at 0.35 T). The mean coefficient of variation was 6.1% for intersubmission phantom measurements, and 2.9% for intrasubmission measurements. For humans, the intersubmission/intrasubmission coefficient of variation was 5.9/3.2% in the genu and 16/6.9% in the cortex. An interactive dashboard for data visualization was also developed: https://rrsg2020.dashboards.neurolibre.org. Conclusion: The T1 intersubmission variability was twice as high as the intrasubmission variability in both phantoms and human brains, indicating that the acquisition details in the original paper were insufficient to reproduce a quantitative MRI protocol. This study reports the inherent uncertainty in T1 measures across independent research groups, bringing us one step closer to a practical clinical baseline of T1 variations in vivo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
07403194
Volume :
92
Issue :
3
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
178020842
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.30111