Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorAndreassen, Maren Marie Sjaastaden_US
dc.contributor.authorGoa, Pål Eriken_US
dc.contributor.authorSjøbakk, Torill Eidhammeren_US
dc.contributor.authorHedayati, Rojaen_US
dc.contributor.authorEikesdal, Hans Petteren_US
dc.contributor.authorDeng, Callieen_US
dc.contributor.authorØstlie, Agnesen_US
dc.contributor.authorLundgren, Steinaren_US
dc.contributor.authorBathen, Tone Frosten_US
dc.contributor.authorJerome, Neil Peteren_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-19T14:13:14Z
dc.date.available2020-06-19T14:13:14Z
dc.date.issued2019-09-27
dc.PublishedAndreassen MMS, Goa PE, Sjøbakk TE, Hedayati R, Eikesdal HP, et al. Semi-automatic segmentation from intrinsically-registered 18F-FDG-PET/MRI for treatment response assessment in a breast cancer cohort: comparison to manual DCE-MRI. Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine. 2020;33:317–328eng
dc.identifier.issn0968-5243
dc.identifier.issn1352-8661
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1956/22779
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To investigate the reliability of simultaneous positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI)-derived biomarkers using semi-automated Gaussian mixture model (GMM) segmentation on PET images, against conventional manual tumor segmentation on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) images. Materials and methods: Twenty-four breast cancer patients underwent PET/MRI (following 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) injection) at baseline and during neoadjuvant treatment, yielding 53 data sets (24 untreated, 29 treated). Two-dimensional tumor segmentation was performed manually on DCE–MRI images (manual DCE) and using GMM with corresponding PET images (GMM–PET). Tumor area and mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) derived from both segmentation methods were compared, and spatial overlap between the segmentations was assessed with Dice similarity coefficient and center-of-gravity displacement. Results: No significant differences were observed between mean ADC and tumor area derived from manual DCE segmentation and GMM–PET. There were strong positive correlations for tumor area and ADC derived from manual DCE and GMM–PET for untreated and treated lesions. The mean Dice score for GMM–PET was 0.770 and 0.649 for untreated and treated lesions, respectively. Discussion: Using PET/MRI, tumor area and mean ADC value estimated with a GMM–PET can replicate manual DCE tumor definition from MRI for monitoring neoadjuvant treatment response in breast cancer.en_US
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherSpringereng
dc.rightsAttribution CC BYeng
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/eng
dc.subjectBreast cancereng
dc.subjectDifusion imagingeng
dc.subjectMixture modellingeng
dc.subjectPET/MRIeng
dc.subjectSegmentationeng
dc.titleSemi-automatic segmentation from intrinsically-registered 18F-FDG-PET/MRI for treatment response assessment in a breast cancer cohort: comparison to manual DCE-MRIen_US
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2020-01-29T08:48:44Z
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2019 The Author(s)
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-019-00778-8
dc.identifier.cristin1748369
dc.source.journalMagnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution CC BY
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution CC BY