Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1

Daniel C. Sullivan, Nancy A. Obuchowski, Larry G. Kessler, David L. Raunig, Constantine Gatsonis, Erich P. Huang, Marina Kondratovich, Lisa M. McShane, Anthony P. Reeves, Daniel P. Barboriak, Alexander Guimaraes, Richard L. Wahl

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

125 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although investigators in the imaging community have been active in developing and evaluating quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs), the development and implementation of QIBs have been hampered by the inconsistent or incorrect use of terminology or methods for technical performance and statistical concepts. Technical performance is an assessment of how a test performs in reference objects or subjects under controlled conditions. In this article, some of the relevant statistical concepts are reviewed, methods that can be used for evaluating and comparing QIBs are described, and some of the technical performance issues related to imaging biomarkers are discussed. More consistent and correct use of terminology and study design principles will improve clinical research, advance regulatory science, and foster better care for patients who undergo imaging studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)813-825
Number of pages13
JournalRadiology
Volume277
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2015

Fingerprint

Biomarkers
Terminology
Patient Care
Research Personnel
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Sullivan, D. C., Obuchowski, N. A., Kessler, L. G., Raunig, D. L., Gatsonis, C., Huang, E. P., ... Wahl, R. L. (2015). Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1 Radiology, 277(3), 813-825. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015142202

Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1 . / Sullivan, Daniel C.; Obuchowski, Nancy A.; Kessler, Larry G.; Raunig, David L.; Gatsonis, Constantine; Huang, Erich P.; Kondratovich, Marina; McShane, Lisa M.; Reeves, Anthony P.; Barboriak, Daniel P.; Guimaraes, Alexander; Wahl, Richard L.

In: Radiology, Vol. 277, No. 3, 01.12.2015, p. 813-825.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sullivan, DC, Obuchowski, NA, Kessler, LG, Raunig, DL, Gatsonis, C, Huang, EP, Kondratovich, M, McShane, LM, Reeves, AP, Barboriak, DP, Guimaraes, A & Wahl, RL 2015, 'Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1 ', Radiology, vol. 277, no. 3, pp. 813-825. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015142202
Sullivan DC, Obuchowski NA, Kessler LG, Raunig DL, Gatsonis C, Huang EP et al. Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1 Radiology. 2015 Dec 1;277(3):813-825. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015142202
Sullivan, Daniel C. ; Obuchowski, Nancy A. ; Kessler, Larry G. ; Raunig, David L. ; Gatsonis, Constantine ; Huang, Erich P. ; Kondratovich, Marina ; McShane, Lisa M. ; Reeves, Anthony P. ; Barboriak, Daniel P. ; Guimaraes, Alexander ; Wahl, Richard L. / Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1 In: Radiology. 2015 ; Vol. 277, No. 3. pp. 813-825.
@article{38ff2d83cfe94c4d80f9acd346cfaf74,
title = "Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1",
abstract = "Although investigators in the imaging community have been active in developing and evaluating quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs), the development and implementation of QIBs have been hampered by the inconsistent or incorrect use of terminology or methods for technical performance and statistical concepts. Technical performance is an assessment of how a test performs in reference objects or subjects under controlled conditions. In this article, some of the relevant statistical concepts are reviewed, methods that can be used for evaluating and comparing QIBs are described, and some of the technical performance issues related to imaging biomarkers are discussed. More consistent and correct use of terminology and study design principles will improve clinical research, advance regulatory science, and foster better care for patients who undergo imaging studies.",
author = "Sullivan, {Daniel C.} and Obuchowski, {Nancy A.} and Kessler, {Larry G.} and Raunig, {David L.} and Constantine Gatsonis and Huang, {Erich P.} and Marina Kondratovich and McShane, {Lisa M.} and Reeves, {Anthony P.} and Barboriak, {Daniel P.} and Alexander Guimaraes and Wahl, {Richard L.}",
year = "2015",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiol.2015142202",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "277",
pages = "813--825",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers1

AU - Sullivan, Daniel C.

AU - Obuchowski, Nancy A.

AU - Kessler, Larry G.

AU - Raunig, David L.

AU - Gatsonis, Constantine

AU - Huang, Erich P.

AU - Kondratovich, Marina

AU - McShane, Lisa M.

AU - Reeves, Anthony P.

AU - Barboriak, Daniel P.

AU - Guimaraes, Alexander

AU - Wahl, Richard L.

PY - 2015/12/1

Y1 - 2015/12/1

N2 - Although investigators in the imaging community have been active in developing and evaluating quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs), the development and implementation of QIBs have been hampered by the inconsistent or incorrect use of terminology or methods for technical performance and statistical concepts. Technical performance is an assessment of how a test performs in reference objects or subjects under controlled conditions. In this article, some of the relevant statistical concepts are reviewed, methods that can be used for evaluating and comparing QIBs are described, and some of the technical performance issues related to imaging biomarkers are discussed. More consistent and correct use of terminology and study design principles will improve clinical research, advance regulatory science, and foster better care for patients who undergo imaging studies.

AB - Although investigators in the imaging community have been active in developing and evaluating quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs), the development and implementation of QIBs have been hampered by the inconsistent or incorrect use of terminology or methods for technical performance and statistical concepts. Technical performance is an assessment of how a test performs in reference objects or subjects under controlled conditions. In this article, some of the relevant statistical concepts are reviewed, methods that can be used for evaluating and comparing QIBs are described, and some of the technical performance issues related to imaging biomarkers are discussed. More consistent and correct use of terminology and study design principles will improve clinical research, advance regulatory science, and foster better care for patients who undergo imaging studies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84948737592&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84948737592&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2015142202

DO - 10.1148/radiol.2015142202

M3 - Article

VL - 277

SP - 813

EP - 825

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 3

ER -