Theory and initial validation of a non-invasive hybrid [15O]O2-PET/MRI approach to obtain image-derived input functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1602 Introduction: The challenges of accurately measuring the image-derived input function (IDIF) in order to avoid invasive arterial sampling for quantitative positron emission tomography (PET) is well recognized [1]. Recent studies focused on imaging the cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO2) have derived the IDIF from time-activity curves (TACs); however, these techniques are either computationally intensive or require calibration to a measured arterial input function [2,3]. Here, we propose a PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) method that uses MRI estimates of whole-brain (WB) cerebral blood flow (CBF) and oxygen extraction fraction (OEF) to scale the IDIF derived from WB [15O]O2-TAC (Fig. 1A). The required MRI measurements can be obtained with the OxFlow sequence [4]. In this study, the theory was validated with animal experiments, which incorporated MRI measurements of WB CBF and OEF. Arterial input functions (AIFs) were measured and PET-only estimates of CMRO2 are available for comparison [5-6]. Methods: [15O]H2O and [15O]O2 PET data were acquired in a hybrid PET/MR scanner (3 T Siemens Biograph mMR), together with simultaneous MRI oximetry (OxFlow), from juvenile pigs (n = 8). Animals were anesthetized with 3% isoflurane and 6 mL/kg/h propofol. Recirculating water was modeled by species-specific parameters [7]. Results: WB-CMRO2 estimates obtained with measured AIF and IDIF (Fig. 2) were 1.81 ± 0.10 and 1.70 ± 0.20 mLO2/100g/min, respectively (ns.). Corresponding WB OEF measurements were 0.31 ± 0.09 and 0.29 ± 0.09 (ns.). Finally, WB-CBV estimated using the IDIFs (average = 3.8 ±0.6 mL/100g) were within the expected normal range. Conclusions: The proposed approach offers a non-invasive alternative to measure CMRO2 by incorporating IDIFs obtained by hybrid PET/MRI. The approach is straightforward as it derives the IDIF directly from the WB PET TAC scaled by the corresponding MRI estimates of OEF and CBF. Furthermore, it avoids partial volume errors typically encountered when deriving the IDIF from region-of-interest analysis of the feeding arteries. Further studies are required to fully validate this approach in a PET/MR scanner on healthy volunteers. References: [1] Zanotti-Fregonara et al. (2011-JCBFM) [2] Su et al. (2017-JCBFM) [3] Kudomi et al. (2018-JCBFM) [4] Wehrli et al. (2014- Acad Radiol) [5] Kudomi et al. (2005-JCBFM) [6] Kudomi et al. (2013-JCBFM) [7] Kudomi et al. (2009-JCBFM) Figure 1. [15O]O2-IDIF (Ao(t) , Eq. 1) obtained by combining the WB TAC from [15O]O2-PET dynamic image with MRI measurements of WB CBF and OEF. WB cerebral blood volume (CBV) was estimated by the Grubb relationship. Eq. 1 is similar to the one obtained by Kudomi et al. [3], but with two terms in the Taylor series expansion. Figure 2. (A) Measured AIFs and (B) IDIFs (solid line; ± one standard deviation—dashed lines.) IDIFs internal dispersion was included to obtain comparable curves (dispersion constant of 20 s was used).
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".