室温下扩散加权成像模体中多机构纵向表观扩散系数的测量

IF 3.3 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Chris Moore , Charlotte Bull , Angela Darekar , Daniel Wilson , Alex Goodall , Prakash Manoharan , Peter Hoskin , Marcel van Herk , David L. Buckley , Damien J. McHugh , Anubhav Datta , Michael J. Dubec
{"title":"室温下扩散加权成像模体中多机构纵向表观扩散系数的测量","authors":"Chris Moore ,&nbsp;Charlotte Bull ,&nbsp;Angela Darekar ,&nbsp;Daniel Wilson ,&nbsp;Alex Goodall ,&nbsp;Prakash Manoharan ,&nbsp;Peter Hoskin ,&nbsp;Marcel van Herk ,&nbsp;David L. Buckley ,&nbsp;Damien J. McHugh ,&nbsp;Anubhav Datta ,&nbsp;Michael J. Dubec","doi":"10.1016/j.phro.2025.100814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>This work contributes to technical validation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as a biomarker of cancer. The aim was to evaluate ADC accuracy, random error, short-term and long-term repeatability and reproducibility, across multiple institutions using a room temperature phantom.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>ADC measurements were made in a travelling room temperature diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) phantom on six scanners at four UK institutions over 18 months at six-month intervals. ADC bias measurements were calculated as the difference between measured and temperature corrected ground-truth ADC values and used to calculate mean ADC bias, isocentre ADC error estimate, short- and long-term intra-scanner repeatability as per the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) DWI profiles, and inter-scanner reproducibility by calculating the 95 % limits of agreement for all ADC bias measurements.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The use of a room-temperature phantom with a magnetic resonance (MR) readable thermometer enabled ADC measurements without ice-water setup, considerably simplifying logistics with respect to multi-institution ADC quality assurance. Mean ADC bias across all scanners and sessions was &lt;0.01 × 10<sup>−3</sup> mm<sup>2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (0.81 %); mean isocentre ADC error estimate was 1.43 %; average scanner short-term repeatability was &lt;0.01 × 10<sup>−3</sup> mm<sup>2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (1 %). Reproducibility was 0.07 × 10<sup>−3</sup> mm<sup>2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (9 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Results indicated good ADC accuracy, repeatability and reproducibility; demonstrating the feasibility of transferring diagnostic DWI sequences between scanners from the same manufacturer, for use in multi-institution longitudinal studies, and assessing ADC with minimal quality control and harmonisation steps required.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36850,"journal":{"name":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","volume":"35 ","pages":"Article 100814"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multi-institution longitudinal apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in a diffusion weighted imaging phantom at room temperature\",\"authors\":\"Chris Moore ,&nbsp;Charlotte Bull ,&nbsp;Angela Darekar ,&nbsp;Daniel Wilson ,&nbsp;Alex Goodall ,&nbsp;Prakash Manoharan ,&nbsp;Peter Hoskin ,&nbsp;Marcel van Herk ,&nbsp;David L. Buckley ,&nbsp;Damien J. McHugh ,&nbsp;Anubhav Datta ,&nbsp;Michael J. Dubec\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.phro.2025.100814\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>This work contributes to technical validation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as a biomarker of cancer. The aim was to evaluate ADC accuracy, random error, short-term and long-term repeatability and reproducibility, across multiple institutions using a room temperature phantom.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>ADC measurements were made in a travelling room temperature diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) phantom on six scanners at four UK institutions over 18 months at six-month intervals. ADC bias measurements were calculated as the difference between measured and temperature corrected ground-truth ADC values and used to calculate mean ADC bias, isocentre ADC error estimate, short- and long-term intra-scanner repeatability as per the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) DWI profiles, and inter-scanner reproducibility by calculating the 95 % limits of agreement for all ADC bias measurements.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The use of a room-temperature phantom with a magnetic resonance (MR) readable thermometer enabled ADC measurements without ice-water setup, considerably simplifying logistics with respect to multi-institution ADC quality assurance. Mean ADC bias across all scanners and sessions was &lt;0.01 × 10<sup>−3</sup> mm<sup>2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (0.81 %); mean isocentre ADC error estimate was 1.43 %; average scanner short-term repeatability was &lt;0.01 × 10<sup>−3</sup> mm<sup>2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (1 %). Reproducibility was 0.07 × 10<sup>−3</sup> mm<sup>2</sup> s<sup>−1</sup> (9 %).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Results indicated good ADC accuracy, repeatability and reproducibility; demonstrating the feasibility of transferring diagnostic DWI sequences between scanners from the same manufacturer, for use in multi-institution longitudinal studies, and assessing ADC with minimal quality control and harmonisation steps required.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\"35 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100814\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631625001198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631625001198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的本研究有助于表观扩散系数(ADC)作为癌症生物标志物的技术验证。目的是评估ADC的准确性,随机误差,短期和长期的可重复性和再现性,在多个机构使用室温模体。材料和方法sadc测量是在英国四家机构的六台扫描仪上进行的,在18个月的时间里,每隔六个月进行一次扩散加权成像(DWI)。ADC偏置测量值计算为测量值与温度校正后的真值ADC值之间的差值,并用于计算平均ADC偏置、等中心ADC误差估计、根据定量成像生物标志物联盟(QIBA) DWI配置文件的扫描仪内短期和长期可重复性,以及通过计算所有ADC偏置测量值的95%一致性限制来计算扫描仪间可重复性。结果使用带有磁共振(MR)可读温度计的室温模体,无需冰水设置即可实现ADC测量,大大简化了多机构ADC质量保证的后勤工作。所有扫描仪和会话的平均ADC偏置为<;0.01 × 10−3 mm2 s−1 (0.81%);平均等心ADC误差估计为1.43%;平均扫描仪短期重复性为<;0.01 × 10−3 mm2 s−1(1%)。重现性为0.07 × 10−3 mm2 s−1(9%)。结论具有良好的ADC准确度、重复性和再现性;演示了在同一制造商的扫描仪之间转移诊断性DWI序列的可行性,用于多机构纵向研究,并以最少的质量控制和协调步骤评估ADC。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multi-institution longitudinal apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in a diffusion weighted imaging phantom at room temperature

Background and purpose

This work contributes to technical validation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as a biomarker of cancer. The aim was to evaluate ADC accuracy, random error, short-term and long-term repeatability and reproducibility, across multiple institutions using a room temperature phantom.

Materials and methods

ADC measurements were made in a travelling room temperature diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) phantom on six scanners at four UK institutions over 18 months at six-month intervals. ADC bias measurements were calculated as the difference between measured and temperature corrected ground-truth ADC values and used to calculate mean ADC bias, isocentre ADC error estimate, short- and long-term intra-scanner repeatability as per the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) DWI profiles, and inter-scanner reproducibility by calculating the 95 % limits of agreement for all ADC bias measurements.

Results

The use of a room-temperature phantom with a magnetic resonance (MR) readable thermometer enabled ADC measurements without ice-water setup, considerably simplifying logistics with respect to multi-institution ADC quality assurance. Mean ADC bias across all scanners and sessions was <0.01 × 10−3 mm2 s−1 (0.81 %); mean isocentre ADC error estimate was 1.43 %; average scanner short-term repeatability was <0.01 × 10−3 mm2 s−1 (1 %). Reproducibility was 0.07 × 10−3 mm2 s−1 (9 %).

Conclusion

Results indicated good ADC accuracy, repeatability and reproducibility; demonstrating the feasibility of transferring diagnostic DWI sequences between scanners from the same manufacturer, for use in multi-institution longitudinal studies, and assessing ADC with minimal quality control and harmonisation steps required.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology Physics and Astronomy-Radiation
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
18.90%
发文量
93
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信