Cargando…

Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) poses challenges in quantitative analysis because voxel intensity values lack physical meaning. While intensity standardization methods exist, their effects on head and neck MRI have not been investigated. We developed a workflow...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wahid, Kareem A., He, Renjie, McDonald, Brigid A., Anderson, Brian M., Salzillo, Travis, Mulder, Sam, Wang, Jarey, Sharafi, Christina Setareh, McCoy, Lance A., Naser, Mohamed A., Ahmed, Sara, Sanders, Keith L., Mohamed, Abdallah S.R., Ding, Yao, Wang, Jihong, Hutcheson, Kate, Lai, Stephen Y., Fuller, Clifton D., van Dijk, Lisanne V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8607477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34849414
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2021.11.001
_version_ 1784602571520868352
author Wahid, Kareem A.
He, Renjie
McDonald, Brigid A.
Anderson, Brian M.
Salzillo, Travis
Mulder, Sam
Wang, Jarey
Sharafi, Christina Setareh
McCoy, Lance A.
Naser, Mohamed A.
Ahmed, Sara
Sanders, Keith L.
Mohamed, Abdallah S.R.
Ding, Yao
Wang, Jihong
Hutcheson, Kate
Lai, Stephen Y.
Fuller, Clifton D.
van Dijk, Lisanne V.
author_facet Wahid, Kareem A.
He, Renjie
McDonald, Brigid A.
Anderson, Brian M.
Salzillo, Travis
Mulder, Sam
Wang, Jarey
Sharafi, Christina Setareh
McCoy, Lance A.
Naser, Mohamed A.
Ahmed, Sara
Sanders, Keith L.
Mohamed, Abdallah S.R.
Ding, Yao
Wang, Jihong
Hutcheson, Kate
Lai, Stephen Y.
Fuller, Clifton D.
van Dijk, Lisanne V.
author_sort Wahid, Kareem A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) poses challenges in quantitative analysis because voxel intensity values lack physical meaning. While intensity standardization methods exist, their effects on head and neck MRI have not been investigated. We developed a workflow based on healthy tissue region of interest (ROI) analysis to determine intensity consistency within a patient cohort. Through this workflow, we systematically evaluated intensity standardization methods for MRI of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two HNC cohorts (30 patients total) were retrospectively analyzed. One cohort was imaged with heterogenous acquisition parameters (HET cohort), whereas the other was imaged with homogenous acquisition parameters (HOM cohort). The standard deviation of cohort-level normalized mean intensity (SD NMI(c)), a metric of intensity consistency, was calculated across ROIs to determine the effect of five intensity standardization methods on T2-weighted images. For each cohort, a Friedman test followed by a post-hoc Bonferroni-corrected Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted to compare SD NMI(c) among methods. RESULTS: Consistency (SD NMI(c) across ROIs) between unstandardized images was substantially more impaired in the HET cohort (0.29 ± 0.08) than in the HOM cohort (0.15 ± 0.03). Consequently, corrected p-values for intensity standardization methods with lower SD NMI(c) compared to unstandardized images were significant in the HET cohort (p < 0.05) but not significant in the HOM cohort (p > 0.05). In both cohorts, differences between methods were often minimal and nonsignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings stress the importance of intensity standardization, either through the utilization of uniform acquisition parameters or specific intensity standardization methods, and the need for testing intensity consistency before performing quantitative analysis of HNC MRI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8607477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86074772021-11-29 Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer Wahid, Kareem A. He, Renjie McDonald, Brigid A. Anderson, Brian M. Salzillo, Travis Mulder, Sam Wang, Jarey Sharafi, Christina Setareh McCoy, Lance A. Naser, Mohamed A. Ahmed, Sara Sanders, Keith L. Mohamed, Abdallah S.R. Ding, Yao Wang, Jihong Hutcheson, Kate Lai, Stephen Y. Fuller, Clifton D. van Dijk, Lisanne V. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Original Research Article BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) poses challenges in quantitative analysis because voxel intensity values lack physical meaning. While intensity standardization methods exist, their effects on head and neck MRI have not been investigated. We developed a workflow based on healthy tissue region of interest (ROI) analysis to determine intensity consistency within a patient cohort. Through this workflow, we systematically evaluated intensity standardization methods for MRI of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two HNC cohorts (30 patients total) were retrospectively analyzed. One cohort was imaged with heterogenous acquisition parameters (HET cohort), whereas the other was imaged with homogenous acquisition parameters (HOM cohort). The standard deviation of cohort-level normalized mean intensity (SD NMI(c)), a metric of intensity consistency, was calculated across ROIs to determine the effect of five intensity standardization methods on T2-weighted images. For each cohort, a Friedman test followed by a post-hoc Bonferroni-corrected Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted to compare SD NMI(c) among methods. RESULTS: Consistency (SD NMI(c) across ROIs) between unstandardized images was substantially more impaired in the HET cohort (0.29 ± 0.08) than in the HOM cohort (0.15 ± 0.03). Consequently, corrected p-values for intensity standardization methods with lower SD NMI(c) compared to unstandardized images were significant in the HET cohort (p < 0.05) but not significant in the HOM cohort (p > 0.05). In both cohorts, differences between methods were often minimal and nonsignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings stress the importance of intensity standardization, either through the utilization of uniform acquisition parameters or specific intensity standardization methods, and the need for testing intensity consistency before performing quantitative analysis of HNC MRI. Elsevier 2021-11-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8607477/ /pubmed/34849414 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2021.11.001 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Wahid, Kareem A.
He, Renjie
McDonald, Brigid A.
Anderson, Brian M.
Salzillo, Travis
Mulder, Sam
Wang, Jarey
Sharafi, Christina Setareh
McCoy, Lance A.
Naser, Mohamed A.
Ahmed, Sara
Sanders, Keith L.
Mohamed, Abdallah S.R.
Ding, Yao
Wang, Jihong
Hutcheson, Kate
Lai, Stephen Y.
Fuller, Clifton D.
van Dijk, Lisanne V.
Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
title Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
title_full Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
title_fullStr Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
title_full_unstemmed Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
title_short Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
title_sort intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8607477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34849414
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2021.11.001
work_keys_str_mv AT wahidkareema intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT herenjie intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT mcdonaldbrigida intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT andersonbrianm intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT salzillotravis intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT muldersam intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT wangjarey intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT sharafichristinasetareh intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT mccoylancea intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT nasermohameda intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT ahmedsara intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT sanderskeithl intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT mohamedabdallahsr intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT dingyao intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT wangjihong intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT hutchesonkate intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT laistepheny intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT fullercliftond intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer
AT vandijklisannev intensitystandardizationmethodsinmagneticresonanceimagingofheadandneckcancer