Literature DB >> 16912378

Optimization algorithms and weighting factors for analysis of dynamic PET studies.

Maqsood Yaqub1, Ronald Boellaard, Marc A Kropholler, Adriaan A Lammertsma.   

Abstract

Positron emission tomography (PET) pharmacokinetic analysis involves fitting of measured PET data to a PET pharmacokinetic model. The fitted parameters may, however, suffer from bias or be unrealistic, especially in the case of noisy data. There are many optimization algorithms, each having different characteristics. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate (1) the performance of different optimization algorithms and (2) the effects of using incorrect weighting factors during optimization in terms of both accuracy and reproducibility of fitted PET pharmacokinetic parameters. In this study, the performance of commonly used optimization algorithms (i.e. interior-reflective Newton methods) and a simulated annealing (SA) method was evaluated. This SA algorithm, known as basin hopping, was modified for the present application. In addition, optimization was performed using various weighting factors. Algorithms and effects of using incorrect weighting factors were studied using both simulated and clinical time-activity curves (TACs). Input data, taken from [(15)O]H(2)O, [(11)C]flumazenil and [(11)C](R)-PK11195 studies, were used to simulate time-activity curves at various variance levels (0-15% COV). Clinical evaluation was based on studies with the same three tracers. SA was able to produce accurate results without the need for selecting appropriate starting values for (kinetic) parameters, in contrast to the interior-reflective Newton method. The latter gave biased results unless it was modified to allow for a range of starting values for the different parameters. For patient studies, where large variability is expected, both SA and the extended Newton method provided accurate results. Simulations and clinical assessment showed similar results for the evaluation of different weighting models in that small to intermediate mismatches between data variance and weighting factors did not significantly affect the outcome of the fits. Large errors were observed only when the mismatch between weighting model and data variance was large. It is concluded that selection of specific optimization algorithms and weighting factors can have a large effect on the accuracy and precision of PET pharmacokinetic analysis. Apart from carefully selecting appropriate algorithms and variance models, further improvement in accuracy might be obtained by using noise reducing strategies, such as wavelet filtering, provided that these methods do not introduce significant bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16912378     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/51/17/007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  33 in total

1.  Wavelet denoising for voxel-based compartmental analysis of peripheral benzodiazepine receptors with (18)F-FEDAA1106.

Authors:  Miho Shidahara; Yoko Ikoma; Chie Seki; Yota Fujimura; Mika Naganawa; Hiroshi Ito; Tetsuya Suhara; Iwao Kanno; Yuichi Kimura
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-11-20       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 2.  Precision and accuracy of clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET: A technical perspective.

Authors:  Jonathan B Moody; Benjamin C Lee; James R Corbett; Edward P Ficaro; Venkatesh L Murthy
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Quantitation of translocator protein binding in human brain with the novel radioligand [18F]-FEPPA and positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Pablo M Rusjan; Alan A Wilson; Peter M Bloomfield; Irina Vitcu; Jeffrey H Meyer; Sylvain Houle; Romina Mizrahi
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 6.200

4.  Mapping human brain fatty acid amide hydrolase activity with PET.

Authors:  Pablo M Rusjan; Alan A Wilson; Romina Mizrahi; Isabelle Boileau; Sofia E Chavez; Nancy J Lobaugh; Stephen J Kish; Sylvain Houle; Junchao Tong
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 6.200

5.  3.5D dynamic PET image reconstruction incorporating kinetics-based clusters.

Authors:  Lijun Lu; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Jing Tang; Wufan Chen; Arman Rahmim
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Assessment of Simplified Methods for Quantification of 18F-FDHT Uptake in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Gerbrand M Kramer; Maqsood Yaqub; Herbert A Vargas; Robert C Schuit; Albert D Windhorst; Alfonsus J M van den Eertwegh; Astrid A M van der Veldt; Andries M Bergman; Eva M Burnazi; Jason S Lewis; Sua Chua; Kevin D Staton; Brad J Beattie; John L Humm; Ian D Davis; Andrew J Weickhardt; Andrew M Scott; Michael J Morris; Otto S Hoekstra; Adriaan A Lammertsma
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Hepatic blood perfusion measured by 3-minute dynamic 18F-FDG PET in pigs.

Authors:  Michael Winterdahl; Ole Lajord Munk; Michael Sørensen; Frank Viborg Mortensen; Susanne Keiding
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Kinetic modelling of [11C]flumazenil using data-driven methods.

Authors:  Isabelle Miederer; Sibylle I Ziegler; Christoph Liedtke; Mary E Spilker; Matthias Miederer; Till Sprenger; Klaus J Wagner; Alexander Drzezga; Henning Boecker
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-11-29       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Test-retest variability of quantitative [11C]PIB studies in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Nelleke Tolboom; Maqsood Yaqub; Ronald Boellaard; Gert Luurtsema; Albert D Windhorst; Philip Scheltens; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Bart N M van Berckel
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Modeling cyclosporine A inhibition of the distribution of a P-glycoprotein PET ligand, 11C-verapamil, into the maternal brain and fetal liver of the pregnant nonhuman primate: impact of tissue blood flow and site of inhibition.

Authors:  Alice Ban Ke; Sara Eyal; Francisco S Chung; Jeanne M Link; David A Mankoff; Mark Muzi; Jashvant D Unadkat
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 10.057

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.