MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

rPOP: Robust PET-only processing of community acquired heterogeneous amyloid-PET data

2021· article· en· W4200538449 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leonardo Iaccarino, Renaud La Joie, Robert A. Koeppe, Barry A. Siegel, Bruce E. Hillner, Constantine Gatsonis, Rachel A. Whitmer, María C. Carrillo, Charles Apgar, Monica R. Camacho, Rachel L. Nosheny, Gil D. Rabinovici

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAvid RadiopharmaceuticalsGenentechNational Institutes of HealthIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierRadiological Society of North AmericaSiemens HealthineersNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationEisaiLantheus Medical ImagingAlzheimer's AssociationFujirebio USPfizerBiogenBioClinicaProgenics PharmaceuticalsF. Hoffmann-La RocheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaAmerican College of RadiologyU.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationJanssen Research and DevelopmentCalifornia Department of Public HealthMerckGE HealthcareAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeJohnson and JohnsonMeso Scale Diagnostics
KeywordsSmoothingNeuroimagingComputer scienceVoxelArtificial intelligencePipeline (software)Positron emission tomographyNuclear medicinePattern recognition (psychology)MedicineComputer visionPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reference standard for amyloid-PET quantification requires structural MRI (sMRI) for preprocessing in both multi-site research studies and clinical trials. Here we describe rPOP (robust PET-Only Processing), a MATLAB-based MRI-free pipeline implementing non-linear warping and differential smoothing of amyloid-PET scans performed with any of the FDA-approved radiotracers (18F-florbetapir/FBP, 18F-florbetaben/FBB or 18F-flutemetamol/FLUTE). Each image undergoes spatial normalization based on weighted PET templates and data-driven differential smoothing, then allowing users to perform their quantification of choice. Prior to normalization, users can choose whether to automatically reset the origin of the image to the center of mass or proceed with the pipeline with the image as it is. We validate rPOP with n = 740 (514 FBP, 182 FBB, 44 FLUTE) amyloid-PET scans from the Imaging Dementia—Evidence for Amyloid Scanning – Brain Health Registry sub-study (IDEAS-BHR) and n = 1,518 scans from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (n = 1,249 FBP, n = 269 FBB), including heterogeneous acquisition and reconstruction protocols. After running rPOP, a standard quantification to extract Standardized Uptake Value ratios and the respective Centiloids conversion was performed. rPOP-based amyloid status (using an independent pathology-based threshold of ≥24.4 Centiloid units) was compared with either local visual reads (IDEAS-BHR, n = 663 with complete valid data and reads available) or with amyloid status derived from an MRI-based PET processing pipeline (ADNI, thresholds of >20/>18 Centiloids for FBP/FBB). Finally, within the ADNI dataset, we tested the linear associations between rPOP- and MRI-based Centiloid values. rPOP achieved accurate warping for N = 2,233/2,258 (98.9%) in the first pass. Of the N = 25 warping failures, 24 were rescued with manual reorientation and origin reset prior to warping. We observed high concordance between rPOP-based amyloid status and both visual reads (IDEAS-BHR, Cohen's k = 0.72 [0.7–0.74], ∼86% concordance) or MRI-pipeline based amyloid status (ADNI, k = 0.88 [0.87–0.89], ∼94% concordance). rPOP- and MRI-pipeline based Centiloids were strongly linearly related (R2:0.95, p<0.001), with this association being significantly modulated by estimated PET resolution (β= -0.016, p<0.001). rPOP provides reliable MRI-free amyloid-PET warping and quantification, leveraging widely available software and only requiring an attenuation-corrected amyloid-PET image as input. The rPOP pipeline enables the comparison and merging of heterogeneous datasets and is publicly available at https://github.com/leoiacca/rPOP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207