TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of six fit algorithms for the intravoxel incoherent motion model of diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging data of pancreatic cancer patients
AU - Gurney-Champion, Oliver J.
AU - Klaassen, Remy
AU - Froeling, Martijn
AU - Barbieri, Sebastiano
AU - Stoker, Jaap
AU - Engelbrecht, Marc R.W.
AU - Wilmink, Johanna W.
AU - Besselink, Marc G.
AU - Bel, Arjan
AU - Van Laarhoven, Hanneke W.M.
AU - Nederveen, Aart J.
PY - 2018/4/1
Y1 - 2018/4/1
N2 - The intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) model for diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) MRI data bears much promise as a tool for visualizing tumours and monitoring treatment response. To improve the currently poor precision of IVIM, several fit algorithms have been suggested. In this work, we compared the performance of two Bayesian IVIM fit algorithms and four other IVIM fit algorithms for pancreatic cancer imaging. DWI data were acquired in 14 pancreatic cancer patients during two MRI examinations. Three different measures of performance of the fitting algorithms were assessed: (i) uniqueness of fit parameters (Spearman's rho); (ii) precision (within-subject coefficient of variation, wCV); and (iii) contrast between tumour and normal-appearing pancreatic tissue. For the diffusivity D and perfusion fraction f, a Bayesian fit (IVIM-Bayesian-lin) offered the best trade-off between tumour contrast and precision. With the exception for IVIMBayesian- lin, all algorithms resulted in a very poor precision of the pseudo-diffusion coefficient D∗ with a wCV of more than 50%. The pseudo-diffusion coefficient D∗ of the Bayesian approaches were, however, significantly correlated with D and f. Therefore, the added value of fitting D∗ was considered limited in pancreatic cancer patients. The easier implemented least squares fit with fixed D∗ (IVIM-fixed) performed similar to IVIM-Bayesian-lin for f and D. In conclusion, the best performing IVIM fit algorithm was IVM-Bayesian-lin, but an easier to implement least squares fit with fixed D∗ performs similarly in pancreatic cancer patients.
AB - The intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) model for diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) MRI data bears much promise as a tool for visualizing tumours and monitoring treatment response. To improve the currently poor precision of IVIM, several fit algorithms have been suggested. In this work, we compared the performance of two Bayesian IVIM fit algorithms and four other IVIM fit algorithms for pancreatic cancer imaging. DWI data were acquired in 14 pancreatic cancer patients during two MRI examinations. Three different measures of performance of the fitting algorithms were assessed: (i) uniqueness of fit parameters (Spearman's rho); (ii) precision (within-subject coefficient of variation, wCV); and (iii) contrast between tumour and normal-appearing pancreatic tissue. For the diffusivity D and perfusion fraction f, a Bayesian fit (IVIM-Bayesian-lin) offered the best trade-off between tumour contrast and precision. With the exception for IVIMBayesian- lin, all algorithms resulted in a very poor precision of the pseudo-diffusion coefficient D∗ with a wCV of more than 50%. The pseudo-diffusion coefficient D∗ of the Bayesian approaches were, however, significantly correlated with D and f. Therefore, the added value of fitting D∗ was considered limited in pancreatic cancer patients. The easier implemented least squares fit with fixed D∗ (IVIM-fixed) performed similar to IVIM-Bayesian-lin for f and D. In conclusion, the best performing IVIM fit algorithm was IVM-Bayesian-lin, but an easier to implement least squares fit with fixed D∗ performs similarly in pancreatic cancer patients.
KW - Aged
KW - Algorithms
KW - Bayes Theorem
KW - Female
KW - Humans
KW - Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/methods
KW - Magnetic Resonance Imaging
KW - Male
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology
KW - Prospective Studies
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045075648&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0194590
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0194590
M3 - Article
C2 - 29617445
AN - SCOPUS:85045075648
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 13
SP - 1
EP - 18
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 4
M1 - e0194590
ER -