Literature DB >> 26836205

A structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging dataset of brain tumour patients.

Cyril R Pernet1,2, Krzysztof J Gorgolewski3, Dominic Job1,2, David Rodriguez1,2, Ian Whittle1,2,4, Joanna Wardlaw1,2.   

Abstract

We collected high resolution structural (T1, T2, DWI) and several functional (BOLD T2*) MRI data in 22 patients with different types of brain tumours. Functional imaging protocols included a motor task, a verb generation task, a word repetition task and resting state. Imaging data are complemented by demographics (age, sex, handedness, and pathology), behavioural results to motor and cognitive tests and direct cortical electrical stimulation data (pictures of stimulation sites with outcomes) performed during surgery. Altogether, these data are suited to test functional imaging methods for single subject analyses, in particular methods that focus on locating eloquent cortical areas, critical functional and/or structural network hubs, and predict patient status based on imaging data (presurgical mapping).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26836205      PMCID: PMC4736501          DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Data        ISSN: 2052-4463            Impact factor:   6.444


Background & summary

Soon after its inception, functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) was used to guide brain tumour surgery[1], and it is nowadays used in almost all areas of neurology research, from developmental to psychiatric disorders, dementia and stroke[2]. Despite this popularity in clinical research and its promising utility for surgical planning[3], it is not used extensively in day to day clinical practice because, among other factors, of its limited accuracy, so far, at delineating eloquent areas in single subjects (but see Gorgolewski et al.[4,5]). The clinical data presented here were acquired in the context of a pilot study examining the feasibility and utility of fMRI for brain tumour surgical planning, with the aim of developing and validating techniques to translate fMRI cognitive paradigms to improved clinical outcomes[6]. Importantly, these clinical data can also be compared with another freely available dataset obtained in healthy volunteers, which used the exact same MRI protocol[7]. Collecting and analysing data from brain tumour patients is challenging because of: (i) the variety of tumour types and locations; (ii) the variety of behavioural and cognitive deficits observed pre- and post- surgery, even for patients that have the same tumour type and at similar locations; and (iii) the almost unavoidable missing data, due to prioritising (for obvious ethical reasons) patients health over research data acquisition. For these reasons there are very few other MRI clinical data available, beside the Multimodal Brain Tumour Image Segmentation Benchmark data[8] which are useful for structural imaging method development. The data presented here are well suited to test functional imaging methods for single subjects, in particular methods that focus on locating eloquent cortical areas, critical functional and structural network hubs, and predict patient status (recovery versus additional deficits caused by surgery versus behavioural improvement) based on imaging data. They can also be used to examine integrated measurements (task based fMRI, with resting state fMRI and Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) network analysis) to investigate issues of brain plasticity and associated behavioural performances at the group level, therefore serving both the biomedical and data science communities.

Methods

The study was approved by the NHS Lothian South East Scotland Research Ethics Committee (REC reference number: 05/S1104/45). Patients gave informed consent for the study, including sharing of anonymised data, for non-commercial purposes (annex 1).

Patient recruitment

Patients (9 Females, 13 Males, aged 25 to 75) were recruited by IW during his clinical consultations. Patients were asked to participate in the study when (i) they had a tumour located in or near a potentially eloquent area that could be mapped (motor cortex, Broca area, auditory cortex and Wernicke area) and (ii) their case posed problems in planning the surgery (e.g., deep tumour presumed to be located under/behind an eloquent area). There were no other inclusion or exclusion criteria. Most tumours were located around the pre-central region above the temporal plane (see Figure 1).
Figure 1

Distribution of tumours across all patients, displayed in MNI space using neurological convention.

Imaging data

Data were acquired on a GE Signa HDxt 1.5 Tesla scanner with an 8 channel phased-array head coil at the Brain Research Imaging Centre, University of Edinburgh, UK. Structural Imaging Data includes high resolution T1-weighted and T2-weighted MRI data collected along with Diffusion weighted imaging suitable for diffusion tensor imaging. Functional Imaging Data include up to 4 protocols per patient: motor task, verb generation task, word repetition task and resting state (an example of data is shown Figure 2, see Table 1 for details). Prior to using these protocols on a clinical population, we validated them in ten healthy controls using a test-retest design[4] to identify tests that were reliable at the single subject level. As mentioned above, data from this study are also publicly available[7] and can be combined with the currently presented dataset. Functional MRI stimuli were presented using the Nordic Neurolab visual and auditory system. Presentation software was used to code the different protocols. The code and stimuli are also available, along with the aforementioned test-retest dataset. Image acquisition parameters for structural and functional data are outlined in Table 2.
Figure 2

From left to right, the first 3 images show structural data: T1-weighted, T2-weighted, Diffusion weighted (Fractional Anisotropy map here) images.

These data are complemented by functional BOLD imaging and Direct Electrical Stimulation.

Table 1

Patients’ information with handedness, pathology obtained from histology (nil if not obtained), tumour location and volume, and details of the MRI sequences obtained along with DES.

ID Sub-ID Handedness Pathology Tumour Location Volume Structural Functional DES
Sex and age are also available with the data but not presented here to avoid possible identification.        
693ad701-54d9-4d33-a1bb-ac047ee507d418638RAstrocytoma type IIRight primary somatosensory area0.056T1-T2-DTIMY
7a11a476-466c-4a9e-9887-db0f80542f7319227RAstrocytoma type IIRight primary somatosensory area0.068DTIM-V-WY
9ef1729e-6db1-4c36-a77c-1ee171a4c26718886LAstrocytoma type IIRight Insula0.189T1-T2-DTIM-V-RY
c2f5ba68-d7cb-46f7-8988-397dc59da90819567RAstrocytoma type IILeft Pre-Motor area0.038T1-T2-DTIM-V-WY
cd9ff8d9-2678-41e5-8633-c3942d8069e418582RAstrocytoma type IIWernicke area0.021T1-T2-DTIM-V-WN
be8f5123-872f-4dcb-ac96-2450e28041c119723LAstrocytoma type IILeft temporal cortex0.091T1-T2-DTIMV-W-RY
40b10c52-6cba-45c4-af41-ed23081782b618428RAstrocytoma type IIIRight Supplementary Motor Area0.054T1-T2-DTIM-RY
03d4a4a9-e33a-4c53-9c55-b81aad73911e19423RGlioblastoma MultiformRight primary motor area0.112T1-T2-DTIM-RY
0153c89e-aed5-48e9-a564-30fe5ceefb2419357RGlioblastoma MultiformRight primary motor area0.099T1-T2-DTIM-RN
9bba1062-9dd7-4d4a-a668-85b337fbbf6418975RGlioblastoma MultiformLeft primary motor area0.017T1-T2-DTIM-V-W-RY
458066eb-478f-4814-aab1-cad1548c320e19015RGlioblastoma MultiformLeft Supplementary Motor Area0.03T1-T2-DTIM-V-WY
d1c8edef-fafc-4e98-8f9e-67ca5823243c18756RGlioblastoma MultiformRight primary motor area0.056T1-T2-DTIM-RY
8987684c-859f-4ea7-9cd0-4371adc4a70e18716RGlioblastoma MultiformRight primary motor area0.096T1-T2-DTIM-V-WN
95733f11-aa48-4a2b-b478-cb02f4ded3ef19085RMeningiomaRight Supplementary Motor Area0.052T1-T2-DTIM-RY
61f986b2-a38e-4ce1-8c6d-4e32d4acebba19275RMeningiomaRight Pre-Motor Area0.031T1-T2-DTIMN
7b7258d1-6569-42fd-94df-a41fdf46202019628RMeningiomaLeft Pre-Motor area0.164T1-T2-DTIM-V-W-RN
a3f242b3-3e8c-40f7-9be0-7ff70e5d569018675RMeningiomaLeft primary motor area0.104T1-T2-DTIM-V-WY
5bcbc416-f72a-46a0-a222-fb7b4575845219691ROligodendrocytoma type IIRight Pre-Motor area0.037T1-T2-DTIM-RY
136d3b26-a0a3-412c-99ec-ba3ece3e617717904ROligodendrocytoma type IILeft Supplementary Motor Area0.031T1-T2-DTIM-V-RY
5be343d8-355e-446d-88bb-7f70574a583e19849RnilRight primary motor area0.007T1-T2M-RY
f9860d61-19c4-4698-9557-b580a57e8e8c19398RMet lung CARight primary somatosensory area0.064T1-T2-DTIM-RY
9517da5f-ff85-40c5-a348-1ce362a7b99718863Lrenal cell carcinomaLeft Pre-Motor Area0.104T1-T2-DTIM-V-WY
Table 2

Summary of MRI sequences and parameters.

Sequence T1 T2 DWI Motor task Word repetition Verb generation Resting state
Pulse type3D IRP (inversion recovery prepared)FAST spin-echosingle-shot spin-echo EPIsingle-shot gradient-echo EPI
In plane FOV   256×256 mm
In plane matrix   256×256
128×12864×64
Slice thickness   1.3 mm
2 mm4 mm
Number of slices156  72
30
Acquisition orderfront to back  top to bottom
interleaved
Slice orientationcoronal  axial
axial (AC-PC)
TR10 s2.5 s16.5 s5 s2.5 s
  
TE4 s102 ms98 ms50 ms
   
Excitation flip angle8909090
   
Sparse samplingn/an/an/a2.5 sn/an/an/a   
Nb of volumes in the time series1171 (7×b=0 and 64×b=1,000 s/mm2)76173184120   
T1 and T2 images were defaced using SPM12, i.e., after computing the affine transform to standard space, the whole area from the forehead to the throat was removed (nullified). Tissue classes and volume estimates are also made available. For each subject, a mask of the tumour and oedema was generated semi-automatically using MRIcron 3D fill tool on the T1 and/or T2 images. This mask was then warped into standard space by estimating deformation form the T1 which allowed to create a new a priori tissue class. Data were then segmented using the ‘new segment’ in SPM12 using the standard priors from the MNI template, augmented by the new tumour class. Volume estimates were computed based on the segmented data and wrapping field obtained as part of the SPM segmentation.

Direct electrical stimulation

DES during neurosurgery was performed in 17 patients. Patients were first anesthetized using propofol or fentanyl in infusion, followed by craniotomy to expose the cortex over and around the tumour using image guidance, and then wakened for DES while in the operating theatre Figure 2. When the electrical current is applied over primary sensory-motor areas, a positive outcome is expected. In the current study, DES over the different parts of the primary motor cortex was expected to induce movements in the associated boby parts. When DES is applied over secondary and associative areas, a negative outcome is expected. In the current study, stimulation of Wernicke or Broca area, a speech impairment or arrest was expected. For each patient undergoing DES procedure a digital photograph of the exposed cortex was taken (prior to the tumour resection), annotated with stimulation sites and the effect of the electrical stimulation. The presence/absence of significant fMRI activations compared to the effect of DES allowed to demonstrate here a good correspondence between techniques[6] when using an adaptive thresholding method[4].

Behavioural data

Data were collected pre- and post-surgery by IW to evaluate impairments before surgery, and evaluate changes following surgery. The assessment of arm and hand function for both the dominant and non-dominant hands was performed using the nine hole peg test (9HPT), while assessment of lower limbs function was performed using a timed 10 meters walk. Five cognitive tests were also performed. The National Adult Reading Test (NART) was used to estimate premorbid intelligence levels of English-speaking patients. The Rey Adult Verbal learning test (RAVLT) was used to evaluating verbal learning and memory. The Williams delayed recall test (WDRT) was used to also provide an estimate of memory performance. The trail making test (TMT) was used to provide information about visual search speed, scanning, mental flexibility and executive functioning. Finally, the controlled oral word association test (COWAT) was used to test verbal fluency. Table 3 (available online only) details which tests were performed in which subjects pre- and post- surgery.
Table 3

Details of which test scores are available pre- post- surgery for each patient (Y for yes collected, N for not collected).

ID Sub-ID NART RAVLT Trail A Trail B 9HPT R 9HPT L COWAT WDRT 10m walk
693ad701-54d9-4d33-a1bb-ac047ee507d418638YNYYYYNYY
NNYYYYNYY
7a11a476-466c-4a9e-9887-db0f80542f7319227NNYYNYYYY
NNYYNYYYY
9ef1729e-6db1-4c36-a77c-1ee171a4c26718886YYYYYYYYY
NNYYYYYYY
c2f5ba68-d7cb-46f7-8988-397dc59da90819567NYYYYYYYN
NNNNNNNNN
cd9ff8d9-2678-41e5-8633-c3942d8069e418582YYYYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNN
be8f5123-872f-4dcb-ac96-2450e28041c119723NNNNNNNNN
NNNNNNNNN
40b10c52-6cba-45c4-af41-ed23081782b618428YNYYYYNYY
NNYYYYNYY
03d4a4a9-e33a-4c53-9c55-b81aad73911e19423NNYYYYNYY
NNYYYYNYY
0153c89e-aed5-48e9-a564-30fe5ceefb2419357YNYYYYNYY
NNNNNNNNN
9bba1062-9dd7-4d4a-a668-85b337fbbf6418975YYYYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNN
458066eb-478f-4814-aab1-cad1548c320e19015NNNNYYNNY
NNNNNNNNN
d1c8edef-fafc-4e98-8f9e-67ca5823243c18756YNYYYNNYY
NNNNNNNNN
8987684c-859f-4ea7-9cd0-4371adc4a70e18716YNYYYYNYY
NNNNNNNNN
95733f11-aa48-4a2b-b478-cb02f4ded3ef19085YNYYNYYYY
NNNNNNNNN
61f986b2-a38e-4ce1-8c6d-4e32d4acebba19275YNYYYYNYY
NNYYYYNYY
7b7258d1-6569-42fd-94df-a41fdf46202019628YYYYYYYYY
NYYYYYYYY
a3f242b3-3e8c-40f7-9be0-7ff70e5d569018675YYYYYYYYY
NYYYYYYYY
5bcbc416-f72a-46a0-a222-fb7b4575845219691YNYYYYNYY
NNYYYYNYY
136d3b26-a0a3-412c-99ec-ba3ece3e617717904YYYYYYYYY
NYYYYYYYY
5be343d8-355e-446d-88bb-7f70574a583e19849NNYYYYNYN
NNNNNNNNN
f9860d61-19c4-4698-9557-b580a57e8e8c19398YNYYYYNYY
NNYYYYNYY
9517da5f-ff85-40c5-a348-1ce362a7b99718863YYYYYYYYY
NNYYYYNYY

Data Records

The data are available through the UK data service (http://ukdataservice.ac.uk/) under collection name: ‘A neuroimaging dataset of brain tumour patients’ (Data Citation 1).

Demographics and behavioural data

These are considered as metadata, informing the imaging data. There is one metadata.pdf summarizing the data and a metadata.xlsx file (and the corresponding MRI_DES_data.csv and clinical_data.csv files). In this excel or csv files the age, sex, actual score values to tests and dates of these exam are provided. Data from each patient is available as a tar file with the ID provided in Table 1. Inside the archive is a folder with sub-ID which contains the data organized as zip files. Each zip file names reflects the order in which data were acquired and the sequence name. For instance, 5_finger_foot_lips.zip, 7_resting_state.zip, 8_Axial_T2.zip, 10_cor_3D_IR_PREP.zip, 10_DTI_64G_2.0-mm_isotropic.zip indicates that we started by the fMRI motor task, then resting state and moved onto structural imaging. Note that when DTI was obtained, the average diffusion coefficient, fractional anisotropy, and traceotropic maps were computed automatically by the scanner and made also available here. Finally, there is tissue_classes.zip file which contains the gray, white, csf and tumour tissue images in subject space along with a y*.nii file which corresponds t the deformation field that can be applied to transform data into MNI space). All structural and functional data are in NIfTI format (http://nifti.nimh.nih.gov/). All imaging data have been de-identified, and structural MRI data (T1, T2) were defaced. Along with the imaging data, there is a DES.zip file that contains pictures (.jpg) taken during surgery, indicating sites of stimulation, along with a pdf file specifying additional information like e.g., left/right/front/back.

Technical Validation

Diffusion weighted data and functional MRI protocols used in this study were validated in a set of 10 healthy participants, showing reliable patterns in a test-retest setting. For DTI, we showed that reliable single subject network metric can be obtained from the sequences used[9]. For fMRI data, we showed that tasks used have a high single subject reliability[5] providing that an adaptive thresholding method is used to account for activation shifts in globals[4].

Usage Notes

The imaging data are available only after registration on the UK data service and a request is made. Although the data are de-identified and faces were removed from T1 and T2 imaging data, the detailed clinical records (age, sex, tumour, behavioural deficits, etc.,) might be enough to identify individuals directly[10] or by using database cross-linkage[11]. Data are also available only for non-commercial use, as consented by patients. For these reasons, imaging data are protected by the UK national database user agreement.

Additional Information

Table 3 is only available in the online version of this paper. How to cite this article: Pernet, C. R. et al. A structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging dataset of brain tumour patients. Sci. Data 3:160003 doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.3 (2016).
  11 in total

Review 1.  Functional MRI and its applications to the clinical neurosciences.

Authors:  J A Detre; T F Floyd
Journal:  Neuroscientist       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 7.519

2.  Test-retest reliability of structural brain networks from diffusion MRI.

Authors:  Colin R Buchanan; Cyril R Pernet; Krzysztof J Gorgolewski; Amos J Storkey; Mark E Bastin
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  The evolution of clinical functional imaging during the past 2 decades and its current impact on neurosurgical planning.

Authors:  J J Pillai
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Single subject fMRI test-retest reliability metrics and confounding factors.

Authors:  Krzysztof J Gorgolewski; Amos J Storkey; Mark E Bastin; Ian Whittle; Cyril Pernet
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Identifying personal genomes by surname inference.

Authors:  Melissa Gymrek; Amy L McGuire; David Golan; Eran Halperin; Yaniv Erlich
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase 1.

Authors:  Alan P Gibb; Alison K McCallum
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 25.071

7.  Evaluation of a pre-surgical functional MRI workflow: From data acquisition to reporting.

Authors:  Cyril R Pernet; Krzysztof J Gorgolewski; Dominic Job; David Rodriguez; Amos Storkey; Ian Whittle; Joanna Wardlaw
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 4.046

8.  A test-retest fMRI dataset for motor, language and spatial attention functions.

Authors:  Krzysztof J Gorgolewski; Amos Storkey; Mark E Bastin; Ian R Whittle; Joanna M Wardlaw; Cyril R Pernet
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2013-04-29       Impact factor: 6.524

9.  Adaptive thresholding for reliable topological inference in single subject fMRI analysis.

Authors:  Krzysztof J Gorgolewski; Amos J Storkey; Mark E Bastin; Cyril R Pernet
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-08-25       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 10.  The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS).

Authors:  Bjoern H Menze; Andras Jakab; Stefan Bauer; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Keyvan Farahani; Justin Kirby; Yuliya Burren; Nicole Porz; Johannes Slotboom; Roland Wiest; Levente Lanczi; Elizabeth Gerstner; Marc-André Weber; Tal Arbel; Brian B Avants; Nicholas Ayache; Patricia Buendia; D Louis Collins; Nicolas Cordier; Jason J Corso; Antonio Criminisi; Tilak Das; Hervé Delingette; Çağatay Demiralp; Christopher R Durst; Michel Dojat; Senan Doyle; Joana Festa; Florence Forbes; Ezequiel Geremia; Ben Glocker; Polina Golland; Xiaotao Guo; Andac Hamamci; Khan M Iftekharuddin; Raj Jena; Nigel M John; Ender Konukoglu; Danial Lashkari; José Antonió Mariz; Raphael Meier; Sérgio Pereira; Doina Precup; Stephen J Price; Tammy Riklin Raviv; Syed M S Reza; Michael Ryan; Duygu Sarikaya; Lawrence Schwartz; Hoo-Chang Shin; Jamie Shotton; Carlos A Silva; Nuno Sousa; Nagesh K Subbanna; Gabor Szekely; Thomas J Taylor; Owen M Thomas; Nicholas J Tustison; Gozde Unal; Flor Vasseur; Max Wintermark; Dong Hye Ye; Liang Zhao; Binsheng Zhao; Darko Zikic; Marcel Prastawa; Mauricio Reyes; Koen Van Leemput
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 10.048

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  A Hitchhiker's Guide to Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  José M Soares; Ricardo Magalhães; Pedro S Moreira; Alexandre Sousa; Edward Ganz; Adriana Sampaio; Victor Alves; Paulo Marques; Nuno Sousa
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 4.677

2.  Physiological significance of R-fMRI indices: Can functional metrics differentiate structural lesions (brain tumors)?

Authors:  Zhen Fan; Xiao Chen; Zeng-Xin Qi; Le Li; Bin Lu; Cong-Lin Jiang; Ren-Qing Zhu; Chao-Gan Yan; Liang Chen
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 4.881

3.  Effectiveness of Federated Learning and CNN Ensemble Architectures for Identifying Brain Tumors Using MRI Images.

Authors:  Moinul Islam; Md Tanzim Reza; Mohammed Kaosar; Mohammad Zavid Parvez
Journal:  Neural Process Lett       Date:  2022-08-28       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  Publishing descriptions of non-public clinical datasets: proposed guidance for researchers, repositories, editors and funding organisations.

Authors:  Iain Hrynaszkiewicz; Varsha Khodiyar; Andrew L Hufton; Susanna-Assunta Sansone
Journal:  Res Integr Peer Rev       Date:  2016-06-22
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.