Back

Enhancing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Amyloid PET: The Impact of MR-Guided PET Reconstruction

Khalighi, M. M.; Young, C. B.; Weiss, S.; Zeineh, M.; Davidzon, G.; Mormino, E. C.; Zaharchuk, G.

2025-01-05 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2025.01.04.25319996 medRxiv
Show abstract

18F-Florbetaben (FBB) uptake in the supratentorial cortex is indicative of amyloid positivity. Due to PETs low spatial resolution, image noise, and spill-over of signal from adjacent white-matter into gray-matter, trained readers may provide inconsistent reads and quantitative calculations like Centiloids (CLs) are also affected. A set of 264 18F-Florbetaben (amyloid) PET/MRI exams were reconstructed using conventional ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) method and MR-guided block sequential regularized expectation maximization (MRgBSREM) method. Images from 264 patients reconstructed by OSEM method and rated by 3 trained readers. Fifty-three exams were rated inconsistently and were mixed with another 53 exams which were rated consistently. These 106 subjects were then rated by our readers using the MRgBSREM PET reconstruction method. CLs were measured using both reconstruction methods. There is significant correlation between CL measured by OSEM and MRgBSREM methods with R2=0.99. The number of inconsistent exams dropped by 64% using MRgBSREM method as compared with OSEM method. Using Fleiss-Kappa statistical test, the agreement between readers was raised from "Fair" to "Significant" in the 106-subjects subset. PET reconstruction with MR priors can significantly improve the consistency of ratings among trained readers. Given the prevalence of inconsistent ratings in amyloid PET, methods that enhance the ability to distinguish intermediate amyloid levels could be valuable for the widespread adoption of this modality.

Published in IEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.