MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404511452 · doi:10.3389/fnume.2024.1469490

SMART-PET: a Self-SiMilARiTy-aware generative adversarial framework for reconstructing low-count [18F]-FDG-PET brain imaging

2024· article· en· W4404511452 on OpenAlexaff
Confidence Raymond, Dong Zhang, Jorge Cabello, Linshan Liu, Paulien Moyaert, Jorge G. Burneo, Michael O. Dada, Justin W. Hicks, Elizabeth Finger, Andrea Soddu, Andrea Andrade, Michael T. Jurkiewicz, Udunna Anazodo

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nuclear Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimilarity (geometry)Generative adversarial networkGenerative grammarAdversarial systemPositron emission tomographyNeuroimagingArtificial intelligencePet imagingComputer scienceMedicinePsychologyNeuroscienceNuclear medicineDeep learningImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: In Positron Emission Tomography (PET) imaging, the use of tracers increases radioactive exposure for longitudinal evaluations and in radiosensitive populations such as pediatrics. However, reducing injected PET activity potentially leads to an unfavorable compromise between radiation exposure and image quality, causing lower signal-to-noise ratios and degraded images. Deep learning-based denoising approaches can be employed to recover low count PET image signals: nonetheless, most of these methods rely on structural or anatomic guidance from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and fails to effectively preserve global spatial features in denoised PET images, without impacting signal-to-noise ratios. Methods: In this study, we developed a novel PET only deep learning framework, the Self-SiMilARiTy-Aware Generative Adversarial Framework (SMART), which leverages Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and a self-similarity-aware attention mechanism for denoising [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET images. This study employs a combination of prospective and retrospective datasets in its design. In total, 114 subjects were included in the study, comprising 34 patients who underwent 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG) PET imaging for drug-resistant epilepsy, 10 patients for frontotemporal dementia indications, and 70 healthy volunteers. To effectively denoise PET images without anatomical details from MRI, a self-similarity attention mechanism (SSAB) was devised. which learned the distinctive structural and pathological features. These SSAB-enhanced features were subsequently applied to the SMART GAN algorithm and trained to denoise the low-count PET images using the standard dose PET image acquired from each individual participant as reference. The trained GAN algorithm was evaluated using image quality measures including structural similarity index measure (SSIM), peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), normalized root mean square (NRMSE), Fréchet inception distance (FID), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Results: In comparison to the standard-dose, SMART-PET had on average a SSIM of 0.984 ± 0.007, PSNR of 38.126 ± 2.631 dB, NRMSE of 0.091 ± 0.028, FID of 0.455 ± 0.065, SNR of 0.002 ± 0.001, and CNR of 0.011 ± 0.011. Regions of interest measurements obtained with datasets decimated down to 10% of the original counts, showed a deviation of less than 1.4% when compared to the ground-truth values. Discussion: In general, SMART-PET shows promise in reducing noise in PET images and can synthesize diagnostic quality images with a 90% reduction in standard of care injected activity. These results make it a potential candidate for clinical applications in radiosensitive populations and for longitudinal neurological studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Nuclear MedicineSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207