NNFit: A Self-Supervised Deep Learning Method for Accelerated Quantification of High- Resolution Short Echo Time MR Spectroscopy Datasets.

IF 8.1 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Radiology-Artificial Intelligence Pub Date : 2025-01-15 DOI:10.1148/ryai.230579
Alexander S Giuffrida, Sulaiman Sheriff, Vicki Huang, Brent D Weinberg, Lee A D Cooper, Yuan Liu, Brian J Soher, Michael Treadway, Andrew A Maudsley, Hyunsuk Shim
{"title":"NNFit: A Self-Supervised Deep Learning Method for Accelerated Quantification of High- Resolution Short Echo Time MR Spectroscopy Datasets.","authors":"Alexander S Giuffrida, Sulaiman Sheriff, Vicki Huang, Brent D Weinberg, Lee A D Cooper, Yuan Liu, Brian J Soher, Michael Treadway, Andrew A Maudsley, Hyunsuk Shim","doi":"10.1148/ryai.230579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>\"Just Accepted\" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in <i>Radiology: Artificial Intelligence</i>. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content.</i> Purpose To develop and evaluate the performance of NNFit, a self-supervised deep-learning method for quantification of high-resolution short echo-time (TE) echo-planar spectroscopic imaging (EPSI) datasets, with the goal of addressing the computational bottleneck of conventional spectral quantification methods in the clinical workflow. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 89 short-TE whole-brain EPSI/GRAPPA scans from clinical trials for glioblastoma (Trial 1, May 2014-October 2018) and major-depressive-disorder (Trial 2, 2022- 2023). The training dataset included 685k spectra from 20 participants (60 scans) in Trial 1. The testing-dataset included 115k spectra from 5 participants (13 scans) in Trial 1 and 145k spectra from 7 participants (16 scans) in Trial 2. A comparative analysis was performed between NNFit and a widely used parametric-modeling spectral quantitation method (FITT). Metabolite maps generated by each method were compared using the structural- similarity-index-measure (SSIM) and linear-correlation-coefficient (R<sup>2</sup>). Radiation treatment volumes for glioblastoma based on the metabolite maps were compared with the Dice-coefficient and a two-tailed <i>t</i> test. Results Average SSIM and <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> scores for Trial 1 test set data were 0.91/0.90 (choline), 0.93/0.93 (creatine), 0.93/0.93 (<i>n</i>-acetylaspartate), 0.80/0.72 (myo-inositol), and 0.59/0.47 (glutamate + glutamine). Average scores for Trial 2 test set data were 0.95/0.95, 0.98/0.97, 0.98/0.98, 0.92/0.92, and 0.79/0.81 respectively. The treatment volumes had average Dice coefficient of 0.92. NNFit's average processing time was 90.1 seconds, whereas FITT took 52.9 minutes on average. Conclusion This study demonstrates that a deep learning approach to spectral quantitation offers comparable performance to conventional quantification methods for EPSI data, but with faster processing at short-TE. ©RSNA, 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":29787,"journal":{"name":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","volume":" ","pages":"e230579"},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.230579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

"Just Accepted" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content. Purpose To develop and evaluate the performance of NNFit, a self-supervised deep-learning method for quantification of high-resolution short echo-time (TE) echo-planar spectroscopic imaging (EPSI) datasets, with the goal of addressing the computational bottleneck of conventional spectral quantification methods in the clinical workflow. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 89 short-TE whole-brain EPSI/GRAPPA scans from clinical trials for glioblastoma (Trial 1, May 2014-October 2018) and major-depressive-disorder (Trial 2, 2022- 2023). The training dataset included 685k spectra from 20 participants (60 scans) in Trial 1. The testing-dataset included 115k spectra from 5 participants (13 scans) in Trial 1 and 145k spectra from 7 participants (16 scans) in Trial 2. A comparative analysis was performed between NNFit and a widely used parametric-modeling spectral quantitation method (FITT). Metabolite maps generated by each method were compared using the structural- similarity-index-measure (SSIM) and linear-correlation-coefficient (R2). Radiation treatment volumes for glioblastoma based on the metabolite maps were compared with the Dice-coefficient and a two-tailed t test. Results Average SSIM and R2 scores for Trial 1 test set data were 0.91/0.90 (choline), 0.93/0.93 (creatine), 0.93/0.93 (n-acetylaspartate), 0.80/0.72 (myo-inositol), and 0.59/0.47 (glutamate + glutamine). Average scores for Trial 2 test set data were 0.95/0.95, 0.98/0.97, 0.98/0.98, 0.92/0.92, and 0.79/0.81 respectively. The treatment volumes had average Dice coefficient of 0.92. NNFit's average processing time was 90.1 seconds, whereas FITT took 52.9 minutes on average. Conclusion This study demonstrates that a deep learning approach to spectral quantitation offers comparable performance to conventional quantification methods for EPSI data, but with faster processing at short-TE. ©RSNA, 2025.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.20
自引率
1.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Radiology: Artificial Intelligence is a bi-monthly publication that focuses on the emerging applications of machine learning and artificial intelligence in the field of imaging across various disciplines. This journal is available online and accepts multiple manuscript types, including Original Research, Technical Developments, Data Resources, Review articles, Editorials, Letters to the Editor and Replies, Special Reports, and AI in Brief.
期刊最新文献
A Serial MRI-based Deep Learning Model to Predict Survival in Patients with Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Accuracy of Fully Automated and Human-assisted AI-based CT Quantification of Pleural Effusion Changes after Thoracentesis. Evaluating the Impact of Changes in AI-derived Case Scores over Time on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Outcomes. NNFit: A Self-Supervised Deep Learning Method for Accelerated Quantification of High- Resolution Short Echo Time MR Spectroscopy Datasets. Posttraining Network Compression for 3D Medical Image Segmentation: Reducing Computational Efforts via Tucker Decomposition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1