Improving Sensitivity of Arterial Spin Labeling Perfusion <scp>MRI</scp> in Alzheimer's Disease Using Transfer Learning of Deep Learning‐Based <scp>ASL</scp> Denoising
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arterial spin labeling (ASL) perfusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) denoising through deep learning (DL) often faces insufficient training data from patients. One solution is to train DL models using healthy subjects' data which are more widely available and transfer them to patients' data. PURPOSE: To evaluate the transferability of a DL-based ASL MRI denoising method (DLASL). STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. SUBJECTS: Four hundred and twenty-eight subjects (189 females) from three cohorts. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T two-dimensional (2D) echo-planar imaging (EPI)-based pseudo-continuous ASL (PCASL) and 2D EPI-based pulsed ASL (PASL) sequences. ASSESSMENT: DLASL was trained using young healthy adults' PCASL data (Dataset 1: 250/30 subjects as training/validation set) and was directly transferred (DTF) to PCASL data from Dataset 2 (45 subjects test set) of normal controls (NC) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) groups. DLASL was fine-tuned (DLASLFT) and tested on PASL data from Dataset 3 (103 subjects test set) of NC and AD. An existing non-DL method (NonDL) was used for comparison. Cerebral blood flow (CBF) images from ASL MRI were compared between NC and AD to assess characteristic hypoperfusion (lower CBF) patterns in AD. CBF image quality and CBF map sensitivity for detecting hypoperfusion using peak t-value and suprathreshold cluster size are outcome measures. STATISTICAL TESTS: Paired t-test, two-sample t-test, one-way analysis of variance, and Tukey honestly significant difference, and linear mixed-effects models were used. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Mean contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of Dataset 2 showed that DTF outperformed NonDL (AD: 3.38 vs. 2.64, NC: 3.80 vs. 3.36). On Dataset 3, DLASLFT outperformed NonDL measured by mean CNR (AD: 2.45 vs. 1.87, NC: 2.54 vs. 2.17) and mean radiologic score (2.86 vs. 2.44). Image quality improvement was significant on both test sets. DTF and DLASLFT improved sensitivity for detecting AD-related hypoperfusion patterns compared with NonDL. DATA CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the DLASL's transferability across different ASL sequences and different populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".