Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38689178›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2024

Diffusion probabilistic versus generative adversarial models to reduce contrast agent dose in breast MRI.

Gustav Müller-Franzes, Luisa Huck, Maike Bode, Sven Nebelung, Christiane Kuhl, Daniel Truhn, Teresa Lemainque

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. AI for image quality and patient safety in CT and MRI.European radiology experimental · 2025
    Review
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.

Gustav Müller-Franzes *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Luisa Huck *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Maike BodeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Sven NebelungDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Christiane KuhlDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Daniel TruhnDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Teresa LemainqueDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany. tlemainque@ukaachen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3167-7121

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01KD2215ABundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 031L031ABundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung SWAGBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung TRANSFORM LIVERDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft NE 2136/3-1Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft TR 1800/7-1European Society of Radiology in collaboration with the European Institute for Biomedical Imaging Research Research Seed GrantHORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme 101057091HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme ODELIA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare denoising diffusion probabilistic models (DDPM) and generative adversarial networks (GAN) for recovering contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) subtraction images from virtual low-dose subtraction images.

methodsRetrospective, ethically approved study. DDPM- and GAN-reconstructed single-slice subtraction images of 50 breasts with enhancing lesions were compared to original ones at three dose levels (25%, 10%, 5%) using quantitative measures and radiologic evaluations. Two radiologists stated their preference based on the reconstruction quality and scored the lesion conspicuity as compared to the original, blinded to the model. Fifty lesion-free maximum intensity projections were evaluated for the presence of false-positives. Results were compared between models and dose levels, using generalized linear mixed models.

resultsAt 5% dose, both radiologists preferred the GAN-generated images, whereas at 25% dose, both radiologists preferred the DDPM-generated images. Median lesion conspicuity scores did not differ between GAN and DDPM at 25% dose (5 versus 5, p = 1.000) and 10% dose (4 versus 4, p = 1.000). At 5% dose, both readers assigned higher conspicuity to the GAN than to the DDPM (3 versus 2, p = 0.007). In the lesion-free examinations, DDPM and GAN showed no differences in the false-positive rate at 5% (15% versus 22%), 10% (10% versus 6%), and 25% (6% versus 4%) (p = 1.000).

conclusionsBoth GAN and DDPM yielded promising results in low-dose image reconstruction. However, neither of them showed superior results over the other model for all dose levels and evaluation metrics. Further development is needed to counteract false-positives. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: For MRI-based breast cancer screening, reducing the contrast agent dose is desirable. Diffusion probabilistic models and generative adversarial networks were capable of retrospectively enhancing the signal of low-dose images. Hence, they may supplement imaging with reduced doses in the future. KEY POINTS: • Deep learning may help recover signal in low-dose contrast-enhanced breast MRI. • Two models (DDPM and GAN) were trained at different dose levels. • Radiologists preferred DDPM at 25%, and GAN images at 5% dose. • Lesion conspicuity between DDPM and GAN was similar, except at 5% dose. • GAN and DDPM yield promising results in low-dose image reconstruction.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsContrast MediaMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalRetrospective StudiesContrast MediaArtificial intelligenceBreast neoplasmsContrast mediaMachine learningMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID38689178
PMCPMC11061055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.