Cargando…

A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons

PURPOSE: To demonstrate that constant coefficient of variation (CV), but nonconstant absolute variance in MRI relaxometry (T (1), T (2), R (1), R (2)) data leads to erroneous conclusions based on standard linear models such as ordinary least squares (OLS). We propose a gamma generalized linear model...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kapre, Rohan, Zhou, Junhan, Li, Xinzhe, Beckett, Laurel, Louie, Angelique Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317199/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32048764
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.28192
_version_ 1783550573915668480
author Kapre, Rohan
Zhou, Junhan
Li, Xinzhe
Beckett, Laurel
Louie, Angelique Y.
author_facet Kapre, Rohan
Zhou, Junhan
Li, Xinzhe
Beckett, Laurel
Louie, Angelique Y.
author_sort Kapre, Rohan
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To demonstrate that constant coefficient of variation (CV), but nonconstant absolute variance in MRI relaxometry (T (1), T (2), R (1), R (2)) data leads to erroneous conclusions based on standard linear models such as ordinary least squares (OLS). We propose a gamma generalized linear model identity link (GGLM‐ID) framework that factors the inherent CV into parameter estimates. We first examined the effects on calculations of contrast agent relaxivity before broadening to other applications such as analysis of variance (ANOVA) and liver iron content (LIC). METHODS: Eight models including OLS and GGLM‐ID were initially fit to data obtained on sulfated dextran iron oxide (SDIO) nanoparticles. Both a resampling simulation on the data as well as two separate Monte Carlo simulations (with and without concentration error) were performed to determine mean square error (MSE) and type I error rate. We then evaluated the performance of OLS/GGLM‐ID on R (1) repeatability and LIC data sets. RESULTS: OLS had an MSE of 4–5× that of GGLM‐ID as well as a type I error rate of 20–30%, whereas GGLM‐ID was near the nominal 5% level in the relaxivity study. Only OLS found statistically significant effects of MRI facility on relaxivity in an R (1) repeatability study, but no significant differences were found in a resampling, whereas GGLM was more consistent. GGLM‐ID was also superior to OLS for modeling LIC. CONCLUSIONS: OLS leads to erroneous conclusions when analyzing MRI relaxometry data. GGLM‐ID factors in the inherent CV of an MRI experiment, leading to more reproducible conclusions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7317199
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73171992020-06-30 A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons Kapre, Rohan Zhou, Junhan Li, Xinzhe Beckett, Laurel Louie, Angelique Y. Magn Reson Med Full Paper—Biophysics and Basic Biomedical Research PURPOSE: To demonstrate that constant coefficient of variation (CV), but nonconstant absolute variance in MRI relaxometry (T (1), T (2), R (1), R (2)) data leads to erroneous conclusions based on standard linear models such as ordinary least squares (OLS). We propose a gamma generalized linear model identity link (GGLM‐ID) framework that factors the inherent CV into parameter estimates. We first examined the effects on calculations of contrast agent relaxivity before broadening to other applications such as analysis of variance (ANOVA) and liver iron content (LIC). METHODS: Eight models including OLS and GGLM‐ID were initially fit to data obtained on sulfated dextran iron oxide (SDIO) nanoparticles. Both a resampling simulation on the data as well as two separate Monte Carlo simulations (with and without concentration error) were performed to determine mean square error (MSE) and type I error rate. We then evaluated the performance of OLS/GGLM‐ID on R (1) repeatability and LIC data sets. RESULTS: OLS had an MSE of 4–5× that of GGLM‐ID as well as a type I error rate of 20–30%, whereas GGLM‐ID was near the nominal 5% level in the relaxivity study. Only OLS found statistically significant effects of MRI facility on relaxivity in an R (1) repeatability study, but no significant differences were found in a resampling, whereas GGLM was more consistent. GGLM‐ID was also superior to OLS for modeling LIC. CONCLUSIONS: OLS leads to erroneous conclusions when analyzing MRI relaxometry data. GGLM‐ID factors in the inherent CV of an MRI experiment, leading to more reproducible conclusions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-02-12 2020-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7317199/ /pubmed/32048764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.28192 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Full Paper—Biophysics and Basic Biomedical Research
Kapre, Rohan
Zhou, Junhan
Li, Xinzhe
Beckett, Laurel
Louie, Angelique Y.
A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons
title A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons
title_full A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons
title_fullStr A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons
title_full_unstemmed A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons
title_short A novel gamma GLM approach to MRI relaxometry comparisons
title_sort novel gamma glm approach to mri relaxometry comparisons
topic Full Paper—Biophysics and Basic Biomedical Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317199/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32048764
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.28192
work_keys_str_mv AT kaprerohan anovelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT zhoujunhan anovelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT lixinzhe anovelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT beckettlaurel anovelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT louieangeliquey anovelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT kaprerohan novelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT zhoujunhan novelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT lixinzhe novelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT beckettlaurel novelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons
AT louieangeliquey novelgammaglmapproachtomrirelaxometrycomparisons