Search

Level of evidence5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.

PurposeTo assess the ability of a recent, anatomically designed breast phantom incorporating T1 and diffusion elements to serve as a quality control device for quantitative comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements calculated from diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) within and across MRI systems.Materials and methodsA bilateral breast phantom incorporating multiple T1 and diffusion tissue mimics and a geometric distortion array was imaged with DWI on 1.5 Tesla (T) and 3.0T scanners from two different manufacturers, using three different breast coils (three configurations total). Multiple measurements were acquired to assess the bias and variability of different diffusion weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging sequences on the scanner-coil systems.ResultsThe repeatability of ADC measurements was mixed: the standard deviation relative to baseline across scanner-coil-sequences ranged from low variability (0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22-1.00) to high variability (1.69, 95% CI: 0.17-17.26), depending on material, with the lowest and highest variability from the same scanner-coil-sequence. Assessment of image distortion showed that right/left measurements of the geometric distortion array were 1 to 16% larger on the left coil side compared with the right coil side independent of scanner-coil systems, diffusion weighting, and phase-encoding direction.ConclusionThis breast phantom can be used to measure scanner-coil-sequence bias and variability for DWI. When establishing a multisystem study, this breast phantom may be used to minimize protocol differences (e.g., due to available sequences or shimming technique), to correct for bias that cannot be minimized, and to weigh results from each system depending on respective variability. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016. J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2016;44:846-855.

Rationale and objectivesTumor volume change has potential as a biomarker for diagnosis, therapy planning, and treatment response. Precision was evaluated and compared among semiautomated lung tumor volume measurement algorithms from clinical thoracic computed tomography data sets. The results inform approaches and testing requirements for establishing conformance with the Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance (QIBA) Computed Tomography Volumetry Profile.Materials and methodsIndustry and academic groups participated in a challenge study. Intra-algorithm repeatability and inter-algorithm reproducibility were estimated. Relative magnitudes of various sources of variability were estimated using a linear mixed effects model. Segmentation boundaries were compared to provide a basis on which to optimize algorithm performance for developers.ResultsIntra-algorithm repeatability ranged from 13% (best performing) to 100% (least performing), with most algorithms demonstrating improved repeatability as the tumor size increased. Inter-algorithm reproducibility was determined in three partitions and was found to be 58% for the four best performing groups, 70% for the set of groups meeting repeatability requirements, and 84% when all groups but the least performer were included. The best performing partition performed markedly better on tumors with equivalent diameters greater than 40 mm. Larger tumors benefitted by human editing but smaller tumors did not. One-fifth to one-half of the total variability came from sources independent of the algorithms. Segmentation boundaries differed substantially, not ony in overall volume but also in detail.ConclusionsNine of the 12 participating algorithms pass precision requirements similar to what is indicated in the QIBA Profile, with the caveat that the present study was not designed to explicitly evaluate algorithm profile conformance. Change in tumor volume can be measured with confidence to within ±14% using any of these nine algorithms on tumor sizes greater than 10 mm. No partition of the algorithms was able to meet the QIBA requirements for interchangeability down to 10 mm, although the partition comprising best performing algorithms did meet this requirement for a tumor size of greater than approximately 40 mm.