Luyun Chen, Zheng Ren, Kelly A. Clark, Carolyn Lou, Fang Liu, Quy Cao, Abigail R. Manning, Melissa L. Martin, Elaina Luskin, Carly M. O'Donnell, Christina J. Azevedo, Peter A. Calabresi, Leorah Freeman, Roland G. Henry, Erin E. Longbrake, Jiwon Oh, Nico Papinutto, Michel Bilello, Jae W. Song, Marwa Kaisey, Nancy L. Sicotte, Daniel S. Reich, Andrew J. Solomon, Daniel Ontaneda, Pascal Sati, Martina Absinta, Matthew K. Schindler, Russell T. Shinohara, the NAIMS Cooperative
{"title":"多发性硬化症患者脑部磁共振成像顺磁边缘病变自动检测的多中心验证。","authors":"Luyun Chen, Zheng Ren, Kelly A. Clark, Carolyn Lou, Fang Liu, Quy Cao, Abigail R. Manning, Melissa L. Martin, Elaina Luskin, Carly M. O'Donnell, Christina J. Azevedo, Peter A. Calabresi, Leorah Freeman, Roland G. Henry, Erin E. Longbrake, Jiwon Oh, Nico Papinutto, Michel Bilello, Jae W. Song, Marwa Kaisey, Nancy L. Sicotte, Daniel S. Reich, Andrew J. Solomon, Daniel Ontaneda, Pascal Sati, Martina Absinta, Matthew K. Schindler, Russell T. Shinohara, the NAIMS Cooperative","doi":"10.1111/jon.13242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Paramagnetic rim lesions (PRLs) are an MRI biomarker of chronic inflammation in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). PRLs may aid in the diagnosis and prognosis of MS. However, manual identification of PRLs is time-consuming and prone to poor interrater reliability. To address these challenges, the Automated Paramagnetic Rim Lesion (APRL) algorithm was developed to automate PRL detection. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of APRL for detecting PRLs in a multicenter setting.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We applied APRL to a multicenter dataset, which included 3-Tesla MRI acquired in 92 participants (43 with MS, 14 with clinically isolated syndrome [CIS]/radiologically isolated syndrome [RIS], 35 without RIS/CIS/MS). Subsequently, we assessed APRL's performance by comparing its results with manual PRL assessments carried out by a team of trained raters.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Among the 92 participants, expert raters identified 5637 white matter lesions and 148 PRLs. The automated segmentation method successfully captured 115 (78%) of the manually identified PRLs. Within these 115 identified lesions, APRL differentiated between manually identified PRLs and non-PRLs with an area under the curve (AUC) of .73 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [.68, .78]). At the subject level, the count of APRL-identified PRLs predicted MS diagnosis with an AUC of .69 (95% CI: [.57, .81]).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our study demonstrated APRL's capability to differentiate between PRLs and lesions without paramagnetic rims in a multicenter study. Automated identification of PRLs offers greater efficiency over manual identification and could facilitate large-scale assessments of PRLs in clinical trials.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neuroimaging","volume":"34 6","pages":"750-757"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multicenter validation of automated detection of paramagnetic rim lesions on brain MRI in multiple sclerosis\",\"authors\":\"Luyun Chen, Zheng Ren, Kelly A. Clark, Carolyn Lou, Fang Liu, Quy Cao, Abigail R. Manning, Melissa L. Martin, Elaina Luskin, Carly M. O'Donnell, Christina J. Azevedo, Peter A. Calabresi, Leorah Freeman, Roland G. Henry, Erin E. Longbrake, Jiwon Oh, Nico Papinutto, Michel Bilello, Jae W. Song, Marwa Kaisey, Nancy L. Sicotte, Daniel S. Reich, Andrew J. Solomon, Daniel Ontaneda, Pascal Sati, Martina Absinta, Matthew K. Schindler, Russell T. Shinohara, the NAIMS Cooperative\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jon.13242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background and Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>Paramagnetic rim lesions (PRLs) are an MRI biomarker of chronic inflammation in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). PRLs may aid in the diagnosis and prognosis of MS. However, manual identification of PRLs is time-consuming and prone to poor interrater reliability. To address these challenges, the Automated Paramagnetic Rim Lesion (APRL) algorithm was developed to automate PRL detection. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of APRL for detecting PRLs in a multicenter setting.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We applied APRL to a multicenter dataset, which included 3-Tesla MRI acquired in 92 participants (43 with MS, 14 with clinically isolated syndrome [CIS]/radiologically isolated syndrome [RIS], 35 without RIS/CIS/MS). Subsequently, we assessed APRL's performance by comparing its results with manual PRL assessments carried out by a team of trained raters.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Among the 92 participants, expert raters identified 5637 white matter lesions and 148 PRLs. The automated segmentation method successfully captured 115 (78%) of the manually identified PRLs. Within these 115 identified lesions, APRL differentiated between manually identified PRLs and non-PRLs with an area under the curve (AUC) of .73 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [.68, .78]). At the subject level, the count of APRL-identified PRLs predicted MS diagnosis with an AUC of .69 (95% CI: [.57, .81]).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our study demonstrated APRL's capability to differentiate between PRLs and lesions without paramagnetic rims in a multicenter study. Automated identification of PRLs offers greater efficiency over manual identification and could facilitate large-scale assessments of PRLs in clinical trials.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Neuroimaging\",\"volume\":\"34 6\",\"pages\":\"750-757\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Neuroimaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jon.13242\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neuroimaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jon.13242","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Multicenter validation of automated detection of paramagnetic rim lesions on brain MRI in multiple sclerosis
Background and Purpose
Paramagnetic rim lesions (PRLs) are an MRI biomarker of chronic inflammation in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). PRLs may aid in the diagnosis and prognosis of MS. However, manual identification of PRLs is time-consuming and prone to poor interrater reliability. To address these challenges, the Automated Paramagnetic Rim Lesion (APRL) algorithm was developed to automate PRL detection. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of APRL for detecting PRLs in a multicenter setting.
Methods
We applied APRL to a multicenter dataset, which included 3-Tesla MRI acquired in 92 participants (43 with MS, 14 with clinically isolated syndrome [CIS]/radiologically isolated syndrome [RIS], 35 without RIS/CIS/MS). Subsequently, we assessed APRL's performance by comparing its results with manual PRL assessments carried out by a team of trained raters.
Results
Among the 92 participants, expert raters identified 5637 white matter lesions and 148 PRLs. The automated segmentation method successfully captured 115 (78%) of the manually identified PRLs. Within these 115 identified lesions, APRL differentiated between manually identified PRLs and non-PRLs with an area under the curve (AUC) of .73 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [.68, .78]). At the subject level, the count of APRL-identified PRLs predicted MS diagnosis with an AUC of .69 (95% CI: [.57, .81]).
Conclusion
Our study demonstrated APRL's capability to differentiate between PRLs and lesions without paramagnetic rims in a multicenter study. Automated identification of PRLs offers greater efficiency over manual identification and could facilitate large-scale assessments of PRLs in clinical trials.
期刊介绍:
Start reading the Journal of Neuroimaging to learn the latest neurological imaging techniques. The peer-reviewed research is written in a practical clinical context, giving you the information you need on:
MRI
CT
Carotid Ultrasound and TCD
SPECT
PET
Endovascular Surgical Neuroradiology
Functional MRI
Xenon CT
and other new and upcoming neuroscientific modalities.The Journal of Neuroimaging addresses the full spectrum of human nervous system disease, including stroke, neoplasia, degenerating and demyelinating disease, epilepsy, tumors, lesions, infectious disease, cerebral vascular arterial diseases, toxic-metabolic disease, psychoses, dementias, heredo-familial disease, and trauma.Offering original research, review articles, case reports, neuroimaging CPCs, and evaluations of instruments and technology relevant to the nervous system, the Journal of Neuroimaging focuses on useful clinical developments and applications, tested techniques and interpretations, patient care, diagnostics, and therapeutics. Start reading today!