Interpretation of Diffusion MR Imaging Data using a Gamma Distribution Model
Purpose: Although many models have been proposed to interpret non-Gaussian diffusion MRI data in biological tissues, it is often difficult to see the correlation between the MRI data and the histological changes in the tissue. Among these models, so called statistical models, which assume the diffus...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences 2014/03/01, Vol.13(3), pp.191-195 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 195 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 191 |
container_title | Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences |
container_volume | 13 |
creator | OSHIO, Koichi SHINMOTO, Hiroshi MULKERN, Robert V. |
description | Purpose: Although many models have been proposed to interpret non-Gaussian diffusion MRI data in biological tissues, it is often difficult to see the correlation between the MRI data and the histological changes in the tissue. Among these models, so called statistical models, which assume the diffusion coefficient D is distributed continuously within a voxel, are more suitable for interpreting the data in a histological context than others. In this work, we examined a statistical model based on the gamma distribution. Methods: First, the proposed gamma model, the bi-exponential model, and the truncated Gaussian model were compared for goodness of fit. To evaluate diagnostic capability, area fractions of certain D ranges were evaluated. The area fraction for D < 1.0 mm2/s (frac < 1) was attributed to small cancer cells with restricted diffusion, and the area fraction for D > 3.0 mm2/s (frac > 3) was considered to reflect perfusion component. A clinical data set of histologically proven prostate cancer cases from previous study was used. Results: For the cancer tissue, the gamma model was better fit than the truncated Gaussian model, and there was no significant difference between the gamma model and the bi-exponential model. For the normal peripheral zone tissue, there was no significant differences among all models. In the 2D scatter plot of frac < 1 vs. frac > 3, Cancer and non-cancer tissues were clearly separated. Conclusion: Using the proposed model, the diffusion MR data was well fit, and histological interpretation of the data appears possible. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2463/mrms.2014-0016 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1566411308</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1566411308</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-a8a1fea87d8de4d0b3b7d87d6ee3210378064fe8ff9e09fffcf720171de8420b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkL1PwzAQxS0EoqWwMqJILCwp_kgcd0QtlEqtkBDMlpOcS6o4KbYz8N_jNKUDi_3O97tn-yF0S_CUJpw9GmvclGKSxBgTfobGRAgcU4r5edAsyWJGBB2hK-d2GDMR2pdoRFPCswCO0XrVeLB7C175qm2iVkeLSuvO9cXmPVoZta2abbRQXkXhNEgVLZUxKnDO2yrvDnObtoT6Gl1oVTu4Oe4T9Pny_DF_jddvy9X8aR0XnKQ-VkIRDUpkpSghKXHO8iCzkgMwSjDLBOaJBqH1DPBMa13oLHwxIyWIhAZ8gh4G371tvztwXprKFVDXqoG2c5KknCeEMCwCev8P3bWdbcLrDtSMpiLcOEHTgSps65wFLfe2Msr-SIJln7Psc5Z9zrLPOQzcHW273EB5wv-CDcBiAHbOqy2cAGV9VdQw-BEmWb-cfE_t4ktZCQ37BdH2kKY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1566925810</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Interpretation of Diffusion MR Imaging Data using a Gamma Distribution Model</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>J-STAGE (Japan Science & Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic) Freely Available Titles - Japanese</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>OSHIO, Koichi ; SHINMOTO, Hiroshi ; MULKERN, Robert V.</creator><creatorcontrib>OSHIO, Koichi ; SHINMOTO, Hiroshi ; MULKERN, Robert V.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: Although many models have been proposed to interpret non-Gaussian diffusion MRI data in biological tissues, it is often difficult to see the correlation between the MRI data and the histological changes in the tissue. Among these models, so called statistical models, which assume the diffusion coefficient D is distributed continuously within a voxel, are more suitable for interpreting the data in a histological context than others. In this work, we examined a statistical model based on the gamma distribution. Methods: First, the proposed gamma model, the bi-exponential model, and the truncated Gaussian model were compared for goodness of fit. To evaluate diagnostic capability, area fractions of certain D ranges were evaluated. The area fraction for D < 1.0 mm2/s (frac < 1) was attributed to small cancer cells with restricted diffusion, and the area fraction for D > 3.0 mm2/s (frac > 3) was considered to reflect perfusion component. A clinical data set of histologically proven prostate cancer cases from previous study was used. Results: For the cancer tissue, the gamma model was better fit than the truncated Gaussian model, and there was no significant difference between the gamma model and the bi-exponential model. For the normal peripheral zone tissue, there was no significant differences among all models. In the 2D scatter plot of frac < 1 vs. frac > 3, Cancer and non-cancer tissues were clearly separated. Conclusion: Using the proposed model, the diffusion MR data was well fit, and histological interpretation of the data appears possible.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1347-3182</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1880-2206</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2463/mrms.2014-0016</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25167880</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Japan: Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine</publisher><subject>bi-exponential model ; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data ; diffusion MRI ; Humans ; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Male ; Models, Statistical ; non-Gaussian diffusion ; Prostate - pathology ; Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Reproducibility of Results ; statistical model</subject><ispartof>Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences, 2014/03/01, Vol.13(3), pp.191-195</ispartof><rights>2014 by Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine</rights><rights>Copyright Japan Science and Technology Agency 2014</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-a8a1fea87d8de4d0b3b7d87d6ee3210378064fe8ff9e09fffcf720171de8420b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-a8a1fea87d8de4d0b3b7d87d6ee3210378064fe8ff9e09fffcf720171de8420b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1883,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25167880$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>OSHIO, Koichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHINMOTO, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MULKERN, Robert V.</creatorcontrib><title>Interpretation of Diffusion MR Imaging Data using a Gamma Distribution Model</title><title>Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences</title><addtitle>MRMS</addtitle><description>Purpose: Although many models have been proposed to interpret non-Gaussian diffusion MRI data in biological tissues, it is often difficult to see the correlation between the MRI data and the histological changes in the tissue. Among these models, so called statistical models, which assume the diffusion coefficient D is distributed continuously within a voxel, are more suitable for interpreting the data in a histological context than others. In this work, we examined a statistical model based on the gamma distribution. Methods: First, the proposed gamma model, the bi-exponential model, and the truncated Gaussian model were compared for goodness of fit. To evaluate diagnostic capability, area fractions of certain D ranges were evaluated. The area fraction for D < 1.0 mm2/s (frac < 1) was attributed to small cancer cells with restricted diffusion, and the area fraction for D > 3.0 mm2/s (frac > 3) was considered to reflect perfusion component. A clinical data set of histologically proven prostate cancer cases from previous study was used. Results: For the cancer tissue, the gamma model was better fit than the truncated Gaussian model, and there was no significant difference between the gamma model and the bi-exponential model. For the normal peripheral zone tissue, there was no significant differences among all models. In the 2D scatter plot of frac < 1 vs. frac > 3, Cancer and non-cancer tissues were clearly separated. Conclusion: Using the proposed model, the diffusion MR data was well fit, and histological interpretation of the data appears possible.</description><subject>bi-exponential model</subject><subject>Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>diffusion MRI</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Models, Statistical</subject><subject>non-Gaussian diffusion</subject><subject>Prostate - pathology</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>statistical model</subject><issn>1347-3182</issn><issn>1880-2206</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkL1PwzAQxS0EoqWwMqJILCwp_kgcd0QtlEqtkBDMlpOcS6o4KbYz8N_jNKUDi_3O97tn-yF0S_CUJpw9GmvclGKSxBgTfobGRAgcU4r5edAsyWJGBB2hK-d2GDMR2pdoRFPCswCO0XrVeLB7C175qm2iVkeLSuvO9cXmPVoZta2abbRQXkXhNEgVLZUxKnDO2yrvDnObtoT6Gl1oVTu4Oe4T9Pny_DF_jddvy9X8aR0XnKQ-VkIRDUpkpSghKXHO8iCzkgMwSjDLBOaJBqH1DPBMa13oLHwxIyWIhAZ8gh4G371tvztwXprKFVDXqoG2c5KknCeEMCwCev8P3bWdbcLrDtSMpiLcOEHTgSps65wFLfe2Msr-SIJln7Psc5Z9zrLPOQzcHW273EB5wv-CDcBiAHbOqy2cAGV9VdQw-BEmWb-cfE_t4ktZCQ37BdH2kKY</recordid><startdate>20140101</startdate><enddate>20140101</enddate><creator>OSHIO, Koichi</creator><creator>SHINMOTO, Hiroshi</creator><creator>MULKERN, Robert V.</creator><general>Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine</general><general>Japan Science and Technology Agency</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140101</creationdate><title>Interpretation of Diffusion MR Imaging Data using a Gamma Distribution Model</title><author>OSHIO, Koichi ; SHINMOTO, Hiroshi ; MULKERN, Robert V.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-a8a1fea87d8de4d0b3b7d87d6ee3210378064fe8ff9e09fffcf720171de8420b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>bi-exponential model</topic><topic>Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>diffusion MRI</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Models, Statistical</topic><topic>non-Gaussian diffusion</topic><topic>Prostate - pathology</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>statistical model</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>OSHIO, Koichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHINMOTO, Hiroshi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MULKERN, Robert V.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>OSHIO, Koichi</au><au>SHINMOTO, Hiroshi</au><au>MULKERN, Robert V.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Interpretation of Diffusion MR Imaging Data using a Gamma Distribution Model</atitle><jtitle>Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences</jtitle><addtitle>MRMS</addtitle><date>2014-01-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>191</spage><epage>195</epage><pages>191-195</pages><issn>1347-3182</issn><eissn>1880-2206</eissn><abstract>Purpose: Although many models have been proposed to interpret non-Gaussian diffusion MRI data in biological tissues, it is often difficult to see the correlation between the MRI data and the histological changes in the tissue. Among these models, so called statistical models, which assume the diffusion coefficient D is distributed continuously within a voxel, are more suitable for interpreting the data in a histological context than others. In this work, we examined a statistical model based on the gamma distribution. Methods: First, the proposed gamma model, the bi-exponential model, and the truncated Gaussian model were compared for goodness of fit. To evaluate diagnostic capability, area fractions of certain D ranges were evaluated. The area fraction for D < 1.0 mm2/s (frac < 1) was attributed to small cancer cells with restricted diffusion, and the area fraction for D > 3.0 mm2/s (frac > 3) was considered to reflect perfusion component. A clinical data set of histologically proven prostate cancer cases from previous study was used. Results: For the cancer tissue, the gamma model was better fit than the truncated Gaussian model, and there was no significant difference between the gamma model and the bi-exponential model. For the normal peripheral zone tissue, there was no significant differences among all models. In the 2D scatter plot of frac < 1 vs. frac > 3, Cancer and non-cancer tissues were clearly separated. Conclusion: Using the proposed model, the diffusion MR data was well fit, and histological interpretation of the data appears possible.</abstract><cop>Japan</cop><pub>Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine</pub><pmid>25167880</pmid><doi>10.2463/mrms.2014-0016</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1347-3182 |
ispartof | Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences, 2014/03/01, Vol.13(3), pp.191-195 |
issn | 1347-3182 1880-2206 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1566411308 |
source | MEDLINE; J-STAGE (Japan Science & Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic) Freely Available Titles - Japanese; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | bi-exponential model Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data diffusion MRI Humans Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Male Models, Statistical non-Gaussian diffusion Prostate - pathology Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis Reproducibility of Results statistical model |
title | Interpretation of Diffusion MR Imaging Data using a Gamma Distribution Model |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T11%3A08%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Interpretation%20of%20Diffusion%20MR%20Imaging%20Data%20using%20a%20Gamma%20Distribution%20Model&rft.jtitle=Magnetic%20Resonance%20in%20Medical%20Sciences&rft.au=OSHIO,%20Koichi&rft.date=2014-01-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=191&rft.epage=195&rft.pages=191-195&rft.issn=1347-3182&rft.eissn=1880-2206&rft_id=info:doi/10.2463/mrms.2014-0016&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1566411308%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1566925810&rft_id=info:pmid/25167880&rfr_iscdi=true |