Cargando…

Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy

Edited MRS sequences are widely used for studying γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABA) in the human brain. Several algorithms are available for modelling these data, deriving metabolite concentration estimates through peak fitting or a linear combination of basis spectra. The present study compares seven such...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Craven, Alexander R., Bhattacharyya, Pallab K., Clarke, William T., Dydak, Ulrike, Edden, Richard A. E., Ersland, Lars, Mandal, Pravat K., Mikkelsen, Mark, Murdoch, James B., Near, Jamie, Rideaux, Reuben, Shukla, Deepika, Wang, Min, Wilson, Martin, Zöllner, Helge J., Hugdahl, Kenneth, Oeltzschner, Georg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9203918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35078266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nbm.4702
_version_ 1784728801446461440
author Craven, Alexander R.
Bhattacharyya, Pallab K.
Clarke, William T.
Dydak, Ulrike
Edden, Richard A. E.
Ersland, Lars
Mandal, Pravat K.
Mikkelsen, Mark
Murdoch, James B.
Near, Jamie
Rideaux, Reuben
Shukla, Deepika
Wang, Min
Wilson, Martin
Zöllner, Helge J.
Hugdahl, Kenneth
Oeltzschner, Georg
author_facet Craven, Alexander R.
Bhattacharyya, Pallab K.
Clarke, William T.
Dydak, Ulrike
Edden, Richard A. E.
Ersland, Lars
Mandal, Pravat K.
Mikkelsen, Mark
Murdoch, James B.
Near, Jamie
Rideaux, Reuben
Shukla, Deepika
Wang, Min
Wilson, Martin
Zöllner, Helge J.
Hugdahl, Kenneth
Oeltzschner, Georg
author_sort Craven, Alexander R.
collection PubMed
description Edited MRS sequences are widely used for studying γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABA) in the human brain. Several algorithms are available for modelling these data, deriving metabolite concentration estimates through peak fitting or a linear combination of basis spectra. The present study compares seven such algorithms, using data obtained in a large multisite study. GABA‐edited (GABA+, TE = 68 ms MEGA‐PRESS) data from 222 subjects at 20 sites were processed via a standardised pipeline, before modelling with FSL‐MRS, Gannet, AMARES, QUEST, LCModel, Osprey and Tarquin, using standardised vendor‐specific basis sets (for GE, Philips and Siemens) where appropriate. After referencing metabolite estimates (to water or creatine), systematic differences in scale were observed between datasets acquired on different vendors' hardware, presenting across algorithms. Scale differences across algorithms were also observed. Using the correlation between metabolite estimates and voxel tissue fraction as a benchmark, most algorithms were found to be similarly effective in detecting differences in GABA+. An interclass correlation across all algorithms showed single‐rater consistency for GABA+ estimates of around 0.38, indicating moderate agreement. Upon inclusion of a basis set component explicitly modelling the macromolecule signal underlying the observed 3.0 ppm GABA peaks, single‐rater consistency improved to 0.44. Correlation between discrete pairs of algorithms varied, and was concerningly weak in some cases. Our findings highlight the need for consensus on appropriate modelling parameters across different algorithms, and for detailed reporting of the parameters adopted in individual studies to ensure reproducibility and meaningful comparison of outcomes between different studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9203918
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92039182022-07-01 Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy Craven, Alexander R. Bhattacharyya, Pallab K. Clarke, William T. Dydak, Ulrike Edden, Richard A. E. Ersland, Lars Mandal, Pravat K. Mikkelsen, Mark Murdoch, James B. Near, Jamie Rideaux, Reuben Shukla, Deepika Wang, Min Wilson, Martin Zöllner, Helge J. Hugdahl, Kenneth Oeltzschner, Georg NMR Biomed Research Articles Edited MRS sequences are widely used for studying γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABA) in the human brain. Several algorithms are available for modelling these data, deriving metabolite concentration estimates through peak fitting or a linear combination of basis spectra. The present study compares seven such algorithms, using data obtained in a large multisite study. GABA‐edited (GABA+, TE = 68 ms MEGA‐PRESS) data from 222 subjects at 20 sites were processed via a standardised pipeline, before modelling with FSL‐MRS, Gannet, AMARES, QUEST, LCModel, Osprey and Tarquin, using standardised vendor‐specific basis sets (for GE, Philips and Siemens) where appropriate. After referencing metabolite estimates (to water or creatine), systematic differences in scale were observed between datasets acquired on different vendors' hardware, presenting across algorithms. Scale differences across algorithms were also observed. Using the correlation between metabolite estimates and voxel tissue fraction as a benchmark, most algorithms were found to be similarly effective in detecting differences in GABA+. An interclass correlation across all algorithms showed single‐rater consistency for GABA+ estimates of around 0.38, indicating moderate agreement. Upon inclusion of a basis set component explicitly modelling the macromolecule signal underlying the observed 3.0 ppm GABA peaks, single‐rater consistency improved to 0.44. Correlation between discrete pairs of algorithms varied, and was concerningly weak in some cases. Our findings highlight the need for consensus on appropriate modelling parameters across different algorithms, and for detailed reporting of the parameters adopted in individual studies to ensure reproducibility and meaningful comparison of outcomes between different studies. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-02-23 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9203918/ /pubmed/35078266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nbm.4702 Text en © 2022 The Authors. NMR in Biomedicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Craven, Alexander R.
Bhattacharyya, Pallab K.
Clarke, William T.
Dydak, Ulrike
Edden, Richard A. E.
Ersland, Lars
Mandal, Pravat K.
Mikkelsen, Mark
Murdoch, James B.
Near, Jamie
Rideaux, Reuben
Shukla, Deepika
Wang, Min
Wilson, Martin
Zöllner, Helge J.
Hugdahl, Kenneth
Oeltzschner, Georg
Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
title Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
title_full Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
title_fullStr Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
title_short Comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
title_sort comparison of seven modelling algorithms for γ‐aminobutyric acid–edited proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9203918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35078266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nbm.4702
work_keys_str_mv AT cravenalexanderr comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT bhattacharyyapallabk comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT clarkewilliamt comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT dydakulrike comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT eddenrichardae comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT erslandlars comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT mandalpravatk comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT mikkelsenmark comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT murdochjamesb comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT nearjamie comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT rideauxreuben comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT shukladeepika comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT wangmin comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT wilsonmartin comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT zollnerhelgej comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT hugdahlkenneth comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy
AT oeltzschnergeorg comparisonofsevenmodellingalgorithmsforgaminobutyricacideditedprotonmagneticresonancespectroscopy