Back to Search Start Over

A Multi-Institutional Comparison of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameter Calculations

Authors :
Musaddiq J. Awan
Renjie He
Shouhao Zhou
Andrew Beers
Petra J. van Houdt
Rebecca M. Howell
Laurence E. Court
Abdallah S.R. Mohamed
Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer
Yao Ding
Catherine Coolens
Heng Li
R. Jason Stafford
Vlad C. Sandulache
Wei Huang
David A. Hormuth
Kimberly Li
Steven J. Frank
X Fave
Uulke A. van der Heide
James A. Bankson
John D. Hazle
Rachel B. Ger
Kelsey B. Mathieu
Hesham Elhalawani
Daniel P. Barboriak
Caroline Chung
Jihong Wang
Stephen Y. Lai
Clifton D. Fuller
Brandon Driscoll
Thomas E. Yankeelov
Source :
Scientific Reports, Scientific Reports, Vol 7, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2017)
Publication Year :
2017
Publisher :
Nature Publishing Group UK, 2017.

Abstract

Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) provides quantitative metrics (e.g. Ktrans, ve) via pharmacokinetic models. We tested inter-algorithm variability in these quantitative metrics with 11 published DCE-MRI algorithms, all implementing Tofts-Kermode or extended Tofts pharmacokinetic models. Digital reference objects (DROs) with known Ktrans and ve values were used to assess performance at varying noise levels. Additionally, DCE-MRI data from 15 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients over 3 time-points during chemoradiotherapy were used to ascertain Ktrans and ve kinetic trends across algorithms. Algorithms performed well (less than 3% average error) when no noise was present in the DRO. With noise, 87% of Ktrans and 84% of ve algorithm-DRO combinations were generally in the correct order. Low Krippendorff’s alpha values showed that algorithms could not consistently classify patients as above or below the median for a given algorithm at each time point or for differences in values between time points. A majority of the algorithms produced a significant Spearman correlation in ve of the primary gross tumor volume with time. Algorithmic differences in Ktrans and ve values over time indicate limitations in combining/comparing data from distinct DCE-MRI model implementations. Careful cross-algorithm quality-assurance must be utilized as DCE-MRI results may not be interpretable using differing software.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
20452322
Volume :
7
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Scientific Reports
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....985c7225b6f359e4da7fd1a14f9eaaa3