Increased robustness in reference region model analysis of <scp>DCE MRI</scp> using two‐step constrained approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reference region models (RRMs) can quantify tumor perfusion in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI without an arterial input function. Inspection of the RRM reveals that one of the free parameters in the fit is uniquely linked to the reference region and is common to all voxels. A two-step approach is proposed that takes this constraint into account. METHODS: Three constrained RRM (CRRM) approaches were devised and evaluated. Simulations were performed to compare their accuracy and precision over a range of noise and temporal resolutions. The CRRM was also applied on a virtual phantom that simulates different perfusion values. In vivo evaluation was performed on data from breast cancer and soft tissue sarcoma. RESULTS: In simulations, the CRRM consistently improved precision and had better accuracy at low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). In virtual phantom, the CRRMs were able to fit voxels that had similar kinetics to the reference tissue, whereas the unconstrained models failed to accurately fit these voxels. In the in vivo data, the constrained approaches produced parameter maps that had less variability and were in better agreement with the Tofts model. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that the two-step fitting approach of the CRRM can reduce the variability of perfusion estimates for quantifying perfusion with dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI. Magn Reson Med 78:1547-1557, 2017. © 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".