Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network

David C. Newitt, Dariya Malyarenko, Thomas L. Chenevert, C. Chad Quarles, Laura Bell, Andriy Fedorov, Fiona Fennessy, Michael A. Jacobs, Meiyappan Solaiyappan, Stefanie Hectors, Bachir Taouli, Mark Muzi, Paul E. Kinahan, Kathleen M. Schmainda, Melissa A. Prah, Erin N. Taber, Christopher Kroenke, Wei Huang, Lori R. Arlinghaus, Thomas E. Yankeelov & 9 others Yue Cao, Madhava Aryal, Yi Fen Yen, Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer, Amita Shukla-Dave, Maggie Fung, Jiachao Liang, Michael Boss, Nola Hylton

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

Diffusion weighted MRI has become ubiquitous in many areas of medicine, including cancer diagnosis and treatment response monitoring. Reproducibility of diffusion metrics is essential for their acceptance as quantitative biomarkers in these areas. We examined the variability in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) obtained from both postprocessing software implementations utilized by the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network and online scan time-generated ADC maps. Phantom and in vivo breast studies were evaluated for two (ADC2) and four (ADC4) b-value diffusion metrics. Concordance of the majority of implementations was excellent for both phantom ADC measures and in vivo ADC2, with relative biases <0.1% (ADC2) and <0.5% (phantom ADC4) but with higher deviations in ADC at the lowest phantom ADC values. In vivo ADC4 concordance was good, with typical biases of ±2% to 3% but higher for online maps. Multiple b-value ADC implementations were separated into two groups determined by the fitting algorithm. Intergroup mean ADC differences ranged from negligible for phantom data to 2.8% for ADC4 in vivo data. Some higher deviations were found for individual implementations and online parametric maps. Despite generally good concordance, implementation biases in ADC measures are sometimes significant and may be large enough to be of concern in multisite studies.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Article number011003
JournalJournal of Medical Imaging
Volume5
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Breast
Software
Biomarkers
Medicine
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Apparent diffusion coefficient
  • Breast MRI.
  • Reproducibility

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Newitt, D. C., Malyarenko, D., Chenevert, T. L., Quarles, C. C., Bell, L., Fedorov, A., ... Hylton, N. (2018). Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network. Journal of Medical Imaging, 5(1), [011003]. DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011003

Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network. / Newitt, David C.; Malyarenko, Dariya; Chenevert, Thomas L.; Quarles, C. Chad; Bell, Laura; Fedorov, Andriy; Fennessy, Fiona; Jacobs, Michael A.; Solaiyappan, Meiyappan; Hectors, Stefanie; Taouli, Bachir; Muzi, Mark; Kinahan, Paul E.; Schmainda, Kathleen M.; Prah, Melissa A.; Taber, Erin N.; Kroenke, Christopher; Huang, Wei; Arlinghaus, Lori R.; Yankeelov, Thomas E.; Cao, Yue; Aryal, Madhava; Yen, Yi Fen; Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree; Shukla-Dave, Amita; Fung, Maggie; Liang, Jiachao; Boss, Michael; Hylton, Nola.

In: Journal of Medical Imaging, Vol. 5, No. 1, 011003, 2018.

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

Newitt, DC, Malyarenko, D, Chenevert, TL, Quarles, CC, Bell, L, Fedorov, A, Fennessy, F, Jacobs, MA, Solaiyappan, M, Hectors, S, Taouli, B, Muzi, M, Kinahan, PE, Schmainda, KM, Prah, MA, Taber, EN, Kroenke, C, Huang, W, Arlinghaus, LR, Yankeelov, TE, Cao, Y, Aryal, M, Yen, YF, Kalpathy-Cramer, J, Shukla-Dave, A, Fung, M, Liang, J, Boss, M & Hylton, N 2018, 'Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network' Journal of Medical Imaging, vol 5, no. 1, 011003. DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011003
Newitt DC, Malyarenko D, Chenevert TL, Quarles CC, Bell L, Fedorov A et al. Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network. Journal of Medical Imaging. 2018;5(1). 011003. Available from, DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011003
Newitt, David C. ; Malyarenko, Dariya ; Chenevert, Thomas L. ; Quarles, C. Chad ; Bell, Laura ; Fedorov, Andriy ; Fennessy, Fiona ; Jacobs, Michael A. ; Solaiyappan, Meiyappan ; Hectors, Stefanie ; Taouli, Bachir ; Muzi, Mark ; Kinahan, Paul E. ; Schmainda, Kathleen M. ; Prah, Melissa A. ; Taber, Erin N. ; Kroenke, Christopher ; Huang, Wei ; Arlinghaus, Lori R. ; Yankeelov, Thomas E. ; Cao, Yue ; Aryal, Madhava ; Yen, Yi Fen ; Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree ; Shukla-Dave, Amita ; Fung, Maggie ; Liang, Jiachao ; Boss, Michael ; Hylton, Nola. / Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network. In: Journal of Medical Imaging. 2018 ; Vol. 5, No. 1.
@article{d00c6b59c5fb43598fff3a4586f2c4cb,
title = "Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network",
abstract = "Diffusion weighted MRI has become ubiquitous in many areas of medicine, including cancer diagnosis and treatment response monitoring. Reproducibility of diffusion metrics is essential for their acceptance as quantitative biomarkers in these areas. We examined the variability in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) obtained from both postprocessing software implementations utilized by the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network and online scan time-generated ADC maps. Phantom and in vivo breast studies were evaluated for two (ADC2) and four (ADC4) b-value diffusion metrics. Concordance of the majority of implementations was excellent for both phantom ADC measures and in vivo ADC2, with relative biases <0.1% (ADC2) and <0.5% (phantom ADC4) but with higher deviations in ADC at the lowest phantom ADC values. In vivo ADC4 concordance was good, with typical biases of ±2% to 3% but higher for online maps. Multiple b-value ADC implementations were separated into two groups determined by the fitting algorithm. Intergroup mean ADC differences ranged from negligible for phantom data to 2.8% for ADC4 in vivo data. Some higher deviations were found for individual implementations and online parametric maps. Despite generally good concordance, implementation biases in ADC measures are sometimes significant and may be large enough to be of concern in multisite studies.",
keywords = "Apparent diffusion coefficient, Breast MRI., Reproducibility",
author = "Newitt, {David C.} and Dariya Malyarenko and Chenevert, {Thomas L.} and Quarles, {C. Chad} and Laura Bell and Andriy Fedorov and Fiona Fennessy and Jacobs, {Michael A.} and Meiyappan Solaiyappan and Stefanie Hectors and Bachir Taouli and Mark Muzi and Kinahan, {Paul E.} and Schmainda, {Kathleen M.} and Prah, {Melissa A.} and Taber, {Erin N.} and Christopher Kroenke and Wei Huang and Arlinghaus, {Lori R.} and Yankeelov, {Thomas E.} and Yue Cao and Madhava Aryal and Yen, {Yi Fen} and Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer and Amita Shukla-Dave and Maggie Fung and Jiachao Liang and Michael Boss and Nola Hylton",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011003",
volume = "5",
journal = "Journal of Medical Imaging",
issn = "2329-4302",
publisher = "SPIE",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multisite concordance of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements across the NCI quantitative imaging network

AU - Newitt,David C.

AU - Malyarenko,Dariya

AU - Chenevert,Thomas L.

AU - Quarles,C. Chad

AU - Bell,Laura

AU - Fedorov,Andriy

AU - Fennessy,Fiona

AU - Jacobs,Michael A.

AU - Solaiyappan,Meiyappan

AU - Hectors,Stefanie

AU - Taouli,Bachir

AU - Muzi,Mark

AU - Kinahan,Paul E.

AU - Schmainda,Kathleen M.

AU - Prah,Melissa A.

AU - Taber,Erin N.

AU - Kroenke,Christopher

AU - Huang,Wei

AU - Arlinghaus,Lori R.

AU - Yankeelov,Thomas E.

AU - Cao,Yue

AU - Aryal,Madhava

AU - Yen,Yi Fen

AU - Kalpathy-Cramer,Jayashree

AU - Shukla-Dave,Amita

AU - Fung,Maggie

AU - Liang,Jiachao

AU - Boss,Michael

AU - Hylton,Nola

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Diffusion weighted MRI has become ubiquitous in many areas of medicine, including cancer diagnosis and treatment response monitoring. Reproducibility of diffusion metrics is essential for their acceptance as quantitative biomarkers in these areas. We examined the variability in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) obtained from both postprocessing software implementations utilized by the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network and online scan time-generated ADC maps. Phantom and in vivo breast studies were evaluated for two (ADC2) and four (ADC4) b-value diffusion metrics. Concordance of the majority of implementations was excellent for both phantom ADC measures and in vivo ADC2, with relative biases <0.1% (ADC2) and <0.5% (phantom ADC4) but with higher deviations in ADC at the lowest phantom ADC values. In vivo ADC4 concordance was good, with typical biases of ±2% to 3% but higher for online maps. Multiple b-value ADC implementations were separated into two groups determined by the fitting algorithm. Intergroup mean ADC differences ranged from negligible for phantom data to 2.8% for ADC4 in vivo data. Some higher deviations were found for individual implementations and online parametric maps. Despite generally good concordance, implementation biases in ADC measures are sometimes significant and may be large enough to be of concern in multisite studies.

AB - Diffusion weighted MRI has become ubiquitous in many areas of medicine, including cancer diagnosis and treatment response monitoring. Reproducibility of diffusion metrics is essential for their acceptance as quantitative biomarkers in these areas. We examined the variability in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) obtained from both postprocessing software implementations utilized by the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network and online scan time-generated ADC maps. Phantom and in vivo breast studies were evaluated for two (ADC2) and four (ADC4) b-value diffusion metrics. Concordance of the majority of implementations was excellent for both phantom ADC measures and in vivo ADC2, with relative biases <0.1% (ADC2) and <0.5% (phantom ADC4) but with higher deviations in ADC at the lowest phantom ADC values. In vivo ADC4 concordance was good, with typical biases of ±2% to 3% but higher for online maps. Multiple b-value ADC implementations were separated into two groups determined by the fitting algorithm. Intergroup mean ADC differences ranged from negligible for phantom data to 2.8% for ADC4 in vivo data. Some higher deviations were found for individual implementations and online parametric maps. Despite generally good concordance, implementation biases in ADC measures are sometimes significant and may be large enough to be of concern in multisite studies.

KW - Apparent diffusion coefficient

KW - Breast MRI.

KW - Reproducibility

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032566078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032566078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011003

DO - 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.011003

M3 - Article

VL - 5

JO - Journal of Medical Imaging

T2 - Journal of Medical Imaging

JF - Journal of Medical Imaging

SN - 2329-4302

IS - 1

M1 - 011003

ER -