Comparison between PUN and Tofts models in the quantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging

被引:13
|
作者
Mazzetti, S. [1 ]
Gliozzi, A. S. [2 ]
Bracco, C. [1 ]
Russo, F. [1 ]
Regge, D. [1 ]
Stasi, M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Inst Canc Res & Treatment, I-10060 Turin, Italy
[2] Politecn Torino, Inst Phys Condensed Matter & Complex Syst, Dept Appl Sci & Technol, I-10129 Turin, Italy
关键词
COMPUTER-AIDED DIAGNOSIS; PHARMACOKINETIC PARAMETERS; PROSTATE-CANCER; DCE-MRI; GROWTH; GADOPENTETATE; FREQUENCY; TRACER; TISSUE; TUMORS;
D O I
10.1088/0031-9155/57/24/8443
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Dynamic contrast-enhanced study in magnetic resonance imaging (DC-EMRI) is an important tool in oncology to visualize tissues vascularization and to define tumour aggressiveness on the basis of an altered perfusion and permeability. Pharmacokinetic models are generally used to extract hemodynamic parameters, providing a quantitative description of the contrast uptake and wash-out. Empirical functions can also be used to fit experimental data without the need of any assumption about tumour physiology, as in pharmacokinetic models, increasing their diagnostic utility, in particular when automatic diagnosis systems are implemented on the basis of an MRI multiparametric approach. Phenomenological universalities (PUN) represent a novel tool for experimental research and offer a simple and systematic method to represent a set of data independent of the application field. DCE-MRI acquisitions can thus be advantageously evaluated by the extended PUN class, providing a convenient diagnostic tool to analyse functional studies, adding a new set of features for the classification of malignant and benign lesions in computer aided detection systems. In this work the Tofts pharmacokinetic model and the class EU1 generated by the PUN description were compared in the study of DCE-MRI of the prostate, evaluating complexity of model implementation, goodness of fitting results, classification performances and computational cost. The mean R-2 obtained with the EU1 and Tofts model were equal to 0.96 and 0.90, respectively, and the classification performances achieved by the EU1 model and the Tofts implementation discriminated malignant from benign tissues with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve equal to 0.92 and 0.91, respectively. Furthermore, the EU1 model has a simpler functional form which reduces implementation complexity and computational time, requiring 6 min to complete a patient elaboration process, instead of 8 min needed for the Tofts model analysis.
引用
收藏
页码:8443 / 8453
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in the Study of Brain Tumors. Comparison Between the Extended Tofts-Kety Model and a Phenomenological Universalities (PUN) Algorithm
    Bergamino, Maurizio
    Barletta, Laura
    Castellan, Lucio
    Mancardi, Gianluigi
    Roccatagliata, Luca
    JOURNAL OF DIGITAL IMAGING, 2015, 28 (06) : 748 - 754
  • [2] Variability induced by the MR imager in dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging of the prostate
    Brunelle, S.
    Zemmour, C.
    Bratan, F.
    Mege-Lechevallier, F.
    Ruffion, A.
    Colombel, M.
    Crouzet, S.
    Sarran, A.
    Rouviere, O.
    DIAGNOSTIC AND INTERVENTIONAL IMAGING, 2018, 99 (04) : 255 - 264
  • [3] Reliability of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data in primary brain tumours: a comparison of Tofts and shutter speed models
    Inglese, Marianna
    Ordidge, Katherine L.
    Honeyfield, Lesley
    Barwick, Tara D.
    Aboagye, Eric O.
    Waldman, Adam D.
    Grech-Sollars, Matthew
    NEURORADIOLOGY, 2019, 61 (12) : 1375 - 1386
  • [4] Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in the Study of Brain Tumors. Comparison Between the Extended Tofts-Kety Model and a Phenomenological Universalities (PUN) Algorithm
    Maurizio Bergamino
    Laura Barletta
    Lucio Castellan
    Gianluigi Mancardi
    Luca Roccatagliata
    Journal of Digital Imaging, 2015, 28 : 748 - 754
  • [5] Reproducibility of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging
    Thomassin-Naggara, Isabelle
    Cuenod, Charles-Andre
    Balvay, Daniel
    RADIOLOGY, 2013, 269 (02) : 619 - 621
  • [6] Reliability of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data in primary brain tumours: a comparison of Tofts and shutter speed models
    Marianna Inglese
    Katherine L. Ordidge
    Lesley Honeyfield
    Tara D. Barwick
    Eric O. Aboagye
    Adam D. Waldman
    Matthew Grech-Sollars
    Neuroradiology, 2019, 61 : 1375 - 1386
  • [7] Perfusion Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging
    Ibrahim, Mohannad
    Ul Ghazi, Talha
    Bapuraj, Jayapalli Rajiv
    Srinivasan, Ashok
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2021, 29 (04) : 515 - 526
  • [8] Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiation between enchondroma and chondrosarcoma
    De Coninck, T.
    Jans, L.
    Sys, G.
    Huysse, W.
    Verstraeten, T.
    Forsyth, R.
    Poffyn, B.
    Verstraete, K.
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2013, 23 (11) : 3140 - 3152
  • [9] Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiation between enchondroma and chondrosarcoma
    T. De Coninck
    L. Jans
    G. Sys
    W. Huysse
    T. Verstraeten
    R. Forsyth
    B. Poffyn
    K. Verstraete
    European Radiology, 2013, 23 : 3140 - 3152
  • [10] Comparison of Early Contrast Enhancement Models in Ultrafast Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Prostate Cancer
    Clemente, Alfredo
    Selva, Guerino
    Berks, Michael
    Morrone, Federica
    Morrone, Aniello Alessandro
    Aulisa, Michele De Cristofaro
    Bliakharskaia, Ekaterina
    De Nicola, Andrea
    Tartaro, Armando
    Summers, Paul E.
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2024, 14 (09)