Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38174216›Full record

ArticleMachine learning in clinical neuroimaging : 6th international workshop, MLCN 2023, held in conjunction with MICCAI 2023, Vancouver, BC, Canada, October 8, 2023, proceedings. MLCN (Workshop) (6th : 2023 : Vancouver, B.C.)2023

Cross-Attention for Improved Motion Correction in Brain PET.

Zhuotong Cai, Tianyi Zeng, Eléonore V Lieffrig, Jiazhen Zhang, Fuyao Chen, Takuya Toyonaga, Chenyu You, Jingmin Xin, Nanning Zheng, Yihuan Lu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Machine learning in clinical neuroimaging : 6th international workshop, MLCN 2023, held in conjunction with MICCAI 2023, Vancouver, BC, Canada, October 8, 2023, proceedings. MLCN (Workshop) (6th : 2023 : Vancouver, B.C.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Zhuotong CaiInstitute of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, Xi'an Jiaotong University, China.
Tianyi ZengDepartment of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT, USA.
Eléonore V LieffrigDepartment of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT, USA.
Jiazhen ZhangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, New Haven, CT, USA.
Fuyao ChenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, New Haven, CT, USA.
Takuya ToyonagaDepartment of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT, USA.
Chenyu YouDepartment of Electrical Engineering, New Haven, CT, USA.
Jingmin XinInstitute of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, Xi'an Jiaotong University, China.
Nanning ZhengInstitute of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, Xi'an Jiaotong University, China.
Yihuan LuUnited Imaging Healthcare, Shanghai, China yihuan.lu@united-imaging.com.
James S DuncanDepartment of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT, USA.
John A OnofreyDepartment of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT, USA.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Data-driven Head Motion Correction in PET Imaging Using Deep LearningR21EB028954 · NIBIB · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI ONOFREY, JOHN AARON · 2020 to 2022
$866k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB028954
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Head movement during long scan sessions degrades the quality of reconstruction in positron emission tomography (PET) and introduces artifacts, which limits clinical diagnosis and treatment. Recent deep learning-based motion correction work utilized raw PET list-mode data and hardware motion tracking (HMT) to learn head motion in a supervised manner. However, motion prediction results were not robust to testing subjects outside the training data domain. In this paper, we integrate a cross-attention mechanism into the supervised deep learning network to improve motion correction across test subjects. Specifically, cross-attention learns the spatial correspondence between the reference images and moving images to explicitly focus the model on the most correlative inherent information - the head region the motion correction. We validate our approach on brain PET data from two different scanners: HRRT without time of flight (ToF) and mCT with ToF. Compared with traditional and deep learning benchmarks, our network improved the performance of motion correction by 58% and 26% in translation and rotation, respectively, in multi-subject testing in HRRT studies. In mCT studies, our approach improved performance by 66% and 64% for translation and rotation, respectively. Our results demonstrate that cross-attention has the potential to improve the quality of brain PET image reconstruction without the dependence on HMT. All code will be released on GitHub: https://github.com/OnofreyLab/dl_hmc_attention_mlcn2023.

Indexed as

BrainCross-attentionDeep LearningMotion CorrectionPET

Identifiers

PMID38174216
PMCPMC10758996

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.