Deep learning for Dixon MRI-based attenuation correction in PET/MRI of head and neck cancer patients
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Deep learning for Dixon MRI-based attenuation correction in PET/MRI of head and neck cancer patients. / Olin, Anders B.; Hansen, Adam E.; Rasmussen, Jacob H.; Jakoby, Björn; Berthelsen, Anne K.; Ladefoged, Claes N.; Kjær, Andreas; Fischer, Barbara M.; Andersen, Flemming L.
In: EJNMMI Physics, Vol. 9, No. 1, 20, 2022.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Deep learning for Dixon MRI-based attenuation correction in PET/MRI of head and neck cancer patients
AU - Olin, Anders B.
AU - Hansen, Adam E.
AU - Rasmussen, Jacob H.
AU - Jakoby, Björn
AU - Berthelsen, Anne K.
AU - Ladefoged, Claes N.
AU - Kjær, Andreas
AU - Fischer, Barbara M.
AU - Andersen, Flemming L.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Background: Quantitative whole-body PET/MRI relies on accurate patient-specific MRI-based attenuation correction (AC) of PET, which is a non-trivial challenge, especially for the anatomically complex head and neck region. We used a deep learning model developed for dose planning in radiation oncology to derive MRI-based attenuation maps of head and neck cancer patients and evaluated its performance on PET AC. Methods: Eleven head and neck cancer patients, referred for radiotherapy, underwent CT followed by PET/MRI with acquisition of Dixon MRI. Both scans were performed in radiotherapy position. PET AC was performed with three different patient-specific attenuation maps derived from: (1) Dixon MRI using a deep learning network (PETDeep). (2) Dixon MRI using the vendor-provided atlas-based method (PETAtlas). (3) CT, serving as reference (PETCT). We analyzed the effect of the MRI-based AC methods on PET quantification by assessing the average voxelwise error within the entire body, and the error as a function of distance to bone/air. The error in mean uptake within anatomical regions of interest and the tumor was also assessed. Results: The average (± standard deviation) PET voxel error was 0.0 ± 11.4% for PETDeep and −1.3 ± 21.8% for PETAtlas. The error in mean PET uptake in bone/air was much lower for PETDeep (−4%/12%) than for PETAtlas (−15%/84%) and PETDeep also demonstrated a more rapidly decreasing error with distance to bone/air affecting only the immediate surroundings (less than 1 cm). The regions with the largest error in mean uptake were those containing bone (mandible) and air (larynx) for both methods, and the error in tumor mean uptake was −0.6 ± 2.0% for PETDeep and −3.5 ± 4.6% for PETAtlas. Conclusion: The deep learning network for deriving MRI-based attenuation maps of head and neck cancer patients demonstrated accurate AC and exceeded the performance of the vendor-provided atlas-based method both overall, on a lesion-level, and in vicinity of challenging regions such as bone and air.
AB - Background: Quantitative whole-body PET/MRI relies on accurate patient-specific MRI-based attenuation correction (AC) of PET, which is a non-trivial challenge, especially for the anatomically complex head and neck region. We used a deep learning model developed for dose planning in radiation oncology to derive MRI-based attenuation maps of head and neck cancer patients and evaluated its performance on PET AC. Methods: Eleven head and neck cancer patients, referred for radiotherapy, underwent CT followed by PET/MRI with acquisition of Dixon MRI. Both scans were performed in radiotherapy position. PET AC was performed with three different patient-specific attenuation maps derived from: (1) Dixon MRI using a deep learning network (PETDeep). (2) Dixon MRI using the vendor-provided atlas-based method (PETAtlas). (3) CT, serving as reference (PETCT). We analyzed the effect of the MRI-based AC methods on PET quantification by assessing the average voxelwise error within the entire body, and the error as a function of distance to bone/air. The error in mean uptake within anatomical regions of interest and the tumor was also assessed. Results: The average (± standard deviation) PET voxel error was 0.0 ± 11.4% for PETDeep and −1.3 ± 21.8% for PETAtlas. The error in mean PET uptake in bone/air was much lower for PETDeep (−4%/12%) than for PETAtlas (−15%/84%) and PETDeep also demonstrated a more rapidly decreasing error with distance to bone/air affecting only the immediate surroundings (less than 1 cm). The regions with the largest error in mean uptake were those containing bone (mandible) and air (larynx) for both methods, and the error in tumor mean uptake was −0.6 ± 2.0% for PETDeep and −3.5 ± 4.6% for PETAtlas. Conclusion: The deep learning network for deriving MRI-based attenuation maps of head and neck cancer patients demonstrated accurate AC and exceeded the performance of the vendor-provided atlas-based method both overall, on a lesion-level, and in vicinity of challenging regions such as bone and air.
KW - Deep learning
KW - Head and neck cancer
KW - MR-AC
KW - PET/MRI
U2 - 10.1186/s40658-022-00449-z
DO - 10.1186/s40658-022-00449-z
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 35294629
AN - SCOPUS:85126292853
VL - 9
JO - E J N M M I Physics
JF - E J N M M I Physics
SN - 2197-7364
IS - 1
M1 - 20
ER -
ID: 313867396