CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
Advanced Search
Home > Journals > J. Med. Imag. > Volume 2 > Issue 2 > Article
Open Access
26 May 2015 Variability and accuracy of different software packages for dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing glioblastoma progression from pseudoprogression
Zachary S. Kelm, Panagiotis D. Korfiatis, Ravi K. Lingineni, John R. Daniels, Jan C. Buckner, Daniel H. Lachance, Ian F. Parney, Rickey E. Carter, Bradley J. Erickson
Author Affiliations +
Journal of Medical Imaging, Vol. 2, Issue 2, 026001 (May 2015). https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.2.2.026001
Abstract
Determining whether glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is progressing despite treatment is challenging due to the pseudoprogression phenomenon seen on conventional MRIs, but relative cerebral blood volume (CBV) has been shown to be helpful. As CBV’s calculation from perfusion-weighted images is not standardized, we investigated whether there were differences between three FDA-cleared software packages in their CBV output values and subsequent performance regarding predicting survival/progression. Forty-five postradiation therapy GBM cases were retrospectively identified as having indeterminate MRI findings of progression versus pseudoprogression. The dynamic susceptibility contrast MR images were processed with different software and three different relative CBV metrics based on the abnormally enhancing regions were computed. The intersoftware intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.8 and below, depending on the metric used. No statistically significant difference in progression determination performance was found between the software packages, but performance was better for the cohort imaged at 3.0 T versus those imaged at 1.5 T for many relative CBV metric and classification criteria combinations. The results revealed clinically significant variation in relative CBV measures based on the software used, but minimal interoperator variation. We recommend against using specific relative CBV measurement thresholds for GBM progression determination unless the same software or processing algorithm is used.
CC BY: © The Authors. Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI.
Citation Download Citation
Zachary S. Kelm, Panagiotis D. Korfiatis, Ravi K. Lingineni, John R. Daniels, Jan C. Buckner, Daniel H. Lachance, Ian F. Parney, Rickey E. Carter, and Bradley J. Erickson "Variability and accuracy of different software packages for dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing glioblastoma progression from pseudoprogression," Journal of Medical Imaging 2(2), 026001 (26 May 2015). https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.2.2.026001
Published: 26 May 2015
JOURNAL ARTICLE
 14 PAGES
DOWNLOAD PAPER SAVE TO MY LIBRARY
GET CITATION
Lens.org Logo
CITATIONS
Cited by 25 scholarly publications.
Advertisement
Advertisement
KEYWORDS
Tumors
Magnetic resonance imaging
Brain
Image classification
Blood
Image segmentation
Tissues
RELATED CONTENT
Subscribe to Digital Library
Receive Erratum Email Alert
Back to Top