Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28244422›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2017

Robust Estimation of Electron Density From Anatomic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain Using a Unifying Multi-Atlas Approach.

Shangjie Ren, Wendy Hara, Lei Wang, Mark K Buyyounouski, Quynh-Thu Le, Lei Xing, Ruijiang Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. MRI-only treatment planning: benefits and challenges.Physics in medicine and biology · 2018
    Review
  3. An automated A-value measurement tool for accurate cochlear duct length estimation.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Shangjie RenTianjin Key Laboratory of Process Measurement and Control, School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China; Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Wendy HaraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Lei WangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Mark K BuyyounouskiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Quynh-Thu LeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Lei XingDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Ruijiang LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California. Electronic address: rli2@stanford.edu.

Funding

DASSIM-RT and Compressed Sensing-Based Inverse PlanningR01CA176553 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI XING, LEI · 2014 to 2018
$2.4M
MRI-Based Radiation Therapy Treatment PlanningR01CA193730 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LI, RUIJIANG · 2016 to 2020
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA176553NCI NIH HHS R01 CA193730
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop a reliable method to estimate electron density based on anatomic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We proposed a unifying multi-atlas approach for electron density estimation based on standard T1- and T2-weighted MRI. First, a composite atlas was constructed through a voxelwise matching process using multiple atlases, with the goal of mitigating effects of inherent anatomic variations between patients. Next we computed for each voxel 2 kinds of conditional probabilities: (1) electron density given its image intensity on T1- and T2-weighted MR images; and (2) electron density given its spatial location in a reference anatomy, obtained by deformable image registration. These were combined into a unifying posterior probability density function using the Bayesian formalism, which provided the optimal estimates for electron density. We evaluated the method on 10 patients using leave-one-patient-out cross-validation. Receiver operating characteristic analyses for detecting different tissue types were performed.

resultsThe proposed method significantly reduced the errors in electron density estimation, with a mean absolute Hounsfield unit error of 119, compared with 140 and 144 (P<.0001) using conventional T1-weighted intensity and geometry-based approaches, respectively. For detection of bony anatomy, the proposed method achieved an 89% area under the curve, 86% sensitivity, 88% specificity, and 90% accuracy, which improved upon intensity and geometry-based approaches (area under the curve: 79% and 80%, respectively).

conclusionThe proposed multi-atlas approach provides robust electron density estimation and bone detection based on anatomic MRI. If validated on a larger population, our work could enable the use of MRI as a primary modality for radiation treatment planning.

Indexed as

ElectronsAlgorithmsBrainHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingRadiation DosageRadiometryRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySubtraction Technique

Identifiers

PMID28244422
PMCPMC5726227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.