ArticleBiomedical physics & engineering express2019
Feasibility of generating synthetic CT from T1-weighted MRI using a linear mixed-effects regression model.
Article in Biomedical physics & engineering express, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Generation of synthetic computed tomography (sCT) for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only radiotherapy is emerging as a promising direction because it can eliminate the registration error and simplify clinical workflow. The goal of this study was to generate accurate sCT from standard T1-weighted MRI for brain patients. CT and MRI data of twelve patients with brain tumors were retrospectively collected. Linear mixed-effects (LME) regression models were fitted between CT and T1-weighted MRI intensities for different segments in the brain. The whole brain sCTs were generated by combining predicted segments together. Mean absolute error (MAE) between real CTs and sCTs across all patients was 71.1 ± 5.5 Hounsfield Unit (HU). Average differences in the HU values were 1.7 ± 7.1 HU (GM), 0.9 ± 5.1 HU (WM), -24.7 ± 8.0 HU (CSF), 76.4 ± 17.8 HU (bone), 20.9 ± 20.4 HU (fat), -69.4 ± 28.3 HU (air). A simple regression technique has been devised that is capable of producing accurate HU maps from standard T1-weighted MRI, and exceptionally low MAE values indicate accurate prediction of sCTs. Improvement is needed in segmenting MRI using a more automatic approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.