Dikaios, N;
Atkinson, D;
Tudisca, C;
Purpura, P;
Forster, M;
Ahmed, H;
Beale, T;
... Punwani, S; + view all
(2017)
A comparison of Bayesian and non-linear regression methods for robust estimation of pharmacokinetics in DCE-MRI and how it affects cancer diagnosis.
Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics
, 56
pp. 1-10.
10.1016/j.compmedimag.2017.01.003.
Preview |
Text
Emberton_A comparison of Bayesian and non-linear regression methods for robust estimation of pharmacokinetics in DCE-MRI and how it affects cancer diagnosis.pdf - Accepted Version Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
The aim of this work is to compare Bayesian Inference for nonlinear models with commonly used traditional non-linear regression (NR) algorithms for estimating tracer kinetics in Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI). The algorithms are compared in terms of accuracy, and reproducibility under different initialization settings. Further it is investigated how a more robust estimation of tracer kinetics affects cancer diagnosis. The derived tracer kinetics from the Bayesian algorithm were validated against traditional NR algorithms (i.e. Levenberg-Marquardt, simplex) in terms of accuracy on a digital DCE phantom and in terms of goodness-of-fit (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) on ROI-based concentration time courses from two different patient cohorts. The first cohort consisted of 76 men, 20 of whom had significant peripheral zone prostate cancer (any cancer-core-length (CCL) with Gleason>3+3 or any-grade with CCL>=4mm) following transperineal template prostate mapping biopsy. The second cohort consisted of 9 healthy volunteers and 24 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The diagnostic ability of the derived tracer kinetics was assessed with receiver operating characteristic area under curve (ROC AUC) analysis. The Bayesian algorithm accurately recovered the ground-truth tracer kinetics for the digital DCE phantom consistently improving the Structural Similarity Index (SSIM) across the 50 different initializations compared to NR. For optimized initialization, Bayesian did not improve significantly the fitting accuracy on both patient cohorts, and it only significantly improved the ve ROC AUC on the HN population from ROC AUC=0.56 for the simplex to ROC AUC=0.76. For both cohorts, the values and the diagnostic ability of tracer kinetic parameters estimated with the Bayesian algorithm weren't affected by their initialization. To conclude, the Bayesian algorithm led to a more accurate and reproducible quantification of tracer kinetic parameters in DCE-MRI, improving their ROC-AUC and decreasing their dependence on initialization settings.
Type: | Article |
---|---|
Title: | A comparison of Bayesian and non-linear regression methods for robust estimation of pharmacokinetics in DCE-MRI and how it affects cancer diagnosis |
Location: | United States |
Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2017.01.003 |
Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2017.01.00... |
Language: | English |
Additional information: | Copyright © 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This manuscript version is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Non-derivative 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license allows you to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work for personal and non-commercial use providing author and publisher attribution is clearly stated. Further details about CC BY licenses are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/. Access may be initially restricted by the publisher. |
Keywords: | Bayesian inference for nonlinear model, DCE analysis, Head and neck, Prostate cancer |
UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Cancer Institute UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Cancer Institute > Research Department of Oncology UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Medicine UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Medicine > Department of Imaging UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Surgery and Interventional Sci |
URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1542534 |
Archive Staff Only
View Item |