Cargando…
The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II
This multicenter study evaluated the effect of variations in arterial input function (AIF) determination on pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) data using the shutter-speed model (SSM). Data acquired from eleven prostate cancer patients wer...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Grapho Publications, LLC
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6403046/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30854447 http://dx.doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2018.00027 |
_version_ | 1783400499655999488 |
---|---|
author | Huang, Wei Chen, Yiyi Fedorov, Andriy Li, Xia Jajamovich, Guido H. Malyarenko, Dariya I. Aryal, Madhava P. LaViolette, Peter S. Oborski, Matthew J. O'Sullivan, Finbarr Abramson, Richard G. Jafari-Khouzani, Kourosh Afzal, Aneela Tudorica, Alina Moloney, Brendan Gupta, Sandeep N. Besa, Cecilia Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree Mountz, James M. Laymon, Charles M. Muzi, Mark Kinahan, Paul E. Schmainda, Kathleen Cao, Yue Chenevert, Thomas L. Taouli, Bachir Yankeelov, Thomas E. Fennessy, Fiona Li, Xin |
author_facet | Huang, Wei Chen, Yiyi Fedorov, Andriy Li, Xia Jajamovich, Guido H. Malyarenko, Dariya I. Aryal, Madhava P. LaViolette, Peter S. Oborski, Matthew J. O'Sullivan, Finbarr Abramson, Richard G. Jafari-Khouzani, Kourosh Afzal, Aneela Tudorica, Alina Moloney, Brendan Gupta, Sandeep N. Besa, Cecilia Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree Mountz, James M. Laymon, Charles M. Muzi, Mark Kinahan, Paul E. Schmainda, Kathleen Cao, Yue Chenevert, Thomas L. Taouli, Bachir Yankeelov, Thomas E. Fennessy, Fiona Li, Xin |
author_sort | Huang, Wei |
collection | PubMed |
description | This multicenter study evaluated the effect of variations in arterial input function (AIF) determination on pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) data using the shutter-speed model (SSM). Data acquired from eleven prostate cancer patients were shared among nine centers. Each center used a site-specific method to measure the individual AIF from each data set and submitted the results to the managing center. These AIFs, their reference tissue-adjusted variants, and a literature population-averaged AIF, were used by the managing center to perform SSM PK analysis to estimate K(trans) (volume transfer rate constant), v(e) (extravascular, extracellular volume fraction), k(ep) (efflux rate constant), and τ(i) (mean intracellular water lifetime). All other variables, including the definition of the tumor region of interest and precontrast T(1) values, were kept the same to evaluate parameter variations caused by variations in only the AIF. Considerable PK parameter variations were observed with within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) values of 0.58, 0.27, 0.42, and 0.24 for K(trans), v(e), k(ep), and τ(i), respectively, using the unadjusted AIFs. Use of the reference tissue-adjusted AIFs reduced variations in K(trans) and v(e) (wCV = 0.50 and 0.10, respectively), but had smaller effects on k(ep) and τ(i) (wCV = 0.39 and 0.22, respectively). k(ep) is less sensitive to AIF variation than K(trans), suggesting it may be a more robust imaging biomarker of prostate microvasculature. With low sensitivity to AIF uncertainty, the SSM-unique τ(i) parameter may have advantages over the conventional PK parameters in a longitudinal study. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6403046 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Grapho Publications, LLC |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64030462019-03-08 The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II Huang, Wei Chen, Yiyi Fedorov, Andriy Li, Xia Jajamovich, Guido H. Malyarenko, Dariya I. Aryal, Madhava P. LaViolette, Peter S. Oborski, Matthew J. O'Sullivan, Finbarr Abramson, Richard G. Jafari-Khouzani, Kourosh Afzal, Aneela Tudorica, Alina Moloney, Brendan Gupta, Sandeep N. Besa, Cecilia Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree Mountz, James M. Laymon, Charles M. Muzi, Mark Kinahan, Paul E. Schmainda, Kathleen Cao, Yue Chenevert, Thomas L. Taouli, Bachir Yankeelov, Thomas E. Fennessy, Fiona Li, Xin Tomography Research Articles This multicenter study evaluated the effect of variations in arterial input function (AIF) determination on pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) data using the shutter-speed model (SSM). Data acquired from eleven prostate cancer patients were shared among nine centers. Each center used a site-specific method to measure the individual AIF from each data set and submitted the results to the managing center. These AIFs, their reference tissue-adjusted variants, and a literature population-averaged AIF, were used by the managing center to perform SSM PK analysis to estimate K(trans) (volume transfer rate constant), v(e) (extravascular, extracellular volume fraction), k(ep) (efflux rate constant), and τ(i) (mean intracellular water lifetime). All other variables, including the definition of the tumor region of interest and precontrast T(1) values, were kept the same to evaluate parameter variations caused by variations in only the AIF. Considerable PK parameter variations were observed with within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) values of 0.58, 0.27, 0.42, and 0.24 for K(trans), v(e), k(ep), and τ(i), respectively, using the unadjusted AIFs. Use of the reference tissue-adjusted AIFs reduced variations in K(trans) and v(e) (wCV = 0.50 and 0.10, respectively), but had smaller effects on k(ep) and τ(i) (wCV = 0.39 and 0.22, respectively). k(ep) is less sensitive to AIF variation than K(trans), suggesting it may be a more robust imaging biomarker of prostate microvasculature. With low sensitivity to AIF uncertainty, the SSM-unique τ(i) parameter may have advantages over the conventional PK parameters in a longitudinal study. Grapho Publications, LLC 2019-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6403046/ /pubmed/30854447 http://dx.doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2018.00027 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Published by Grapho Publications, LLC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Huang, Wei Chen, Yiyi Fedorov, Andriy Li, Xia Jajamovich, Guido H. Malyarenko, Dariya I. Aryal, Madhava P. LaViolette, Peter S. Oborski, Matthew J. O'Sullivan, Finbarr Abramson, Richard G. Jafari-Khouzani, Kourosh Afzal, Aneela Tudorica, Alina Moloney, Brendan Gupta, Sandeep N. Besa, Cecilia Kalpathy-Cramer, Jayashree Mountz, James M. Laymon, Charles M. Muzi, Mark Kinahan, Paul E. Schmainda, Kathleen Cao, Yue Chenevert, Thomas L. Taouli, Bachir Yankeelov, Thomas E. Fennessy, Fiona Li, Xin The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II |
title | The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II |
title_full | The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II |
title_fullStr | The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II |
title_full_unstemmed | The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II |
title_short | The Impact of Arterial Input Function Determination Variations on Prostate Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Pharmacokinetic Modeling: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge, Part II |
title_sort | impact of arterial input function determination variations on prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging pharmacokinetic modeling: a multicenter data analysis challenge, part ii |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6403046/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30854447 http://dx.doi.org/10.18383/j.tom.2018.00027 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huangwei theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT chenyiyi theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT fedorovandriy theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT lixia theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT jajamovichguidoh theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT malyarenkodariyai theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT aryalmadhavap theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT laviolettepeters theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT oborskimatthewj theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT osullivanfinbarr theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT abramsonrichardg theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT jafarikhouzanikourosh theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT afzalaneela theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT tudoricaalina theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT moloneybrendan theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT guptasandeepn theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT besacecilia theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT kalpathycramerjayashree theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT mountzjamesm theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT laymoncharlesm theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT muzimark theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT kinahanpaule theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT schmaindakathleen theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT caoyue theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT chenevertthomasl theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT taoulibachir theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT yankeelovthomase theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT fennessyfiona theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT lixin theimpactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT huangwei impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT chenyiyi impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT fedorovandriy impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT lixia impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT jajamovichguidoh impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT malyarenkodariyai impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT aryalmadhavap impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT laviolettepeters impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT oborskimatthewj impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT osullivanfinbarr impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT abramsonrichardg impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT jafarikhouzanikourosh impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT afzalaneela impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT tudoricaalina impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT moloneybrendan impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT guptasandeepn impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT besacecilia impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT kalpathycramerjayashree impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT mountzjamesm impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT laymoncharlesm impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT muzimark impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT kinahanpaule impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT schmaindakathleen impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT caoyue impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT chenevertthomasl impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT taoulibachir impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT yankeelovthomase impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT fennessyfiona impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii AT lixin impactofarterialinputfunctiondeterminationvariationsonprostatedynamiccontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingpharmacokineticmodelingamulticenterdataanalysischallengepartii |