| Literature DB >> 29531504 |
Lina Xu1,2, Giles Tetteh1,3, Jana Lipkova1,3, Yu Zhao1,3, Hongwei Li1,3, Patrick Christ1,3, Marie Piraud1,3, Andreas Buck4, Kuangyu Shi2, Bjoern H Menze1,3.
Abstract
The identification of bone lesions is crucial in the diagnostic assessment of multiple myeloma (MM). 68Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT can capture the abnormal molecular expression of CXCR-4 in addition to anatomical changes. However, whole-body detection of dozens of lesions on hybrid imaging is tedious and error prone. It is even more difficult to identify lesions with a large heterogeneity. This study employed deep learning methods to automatically combine characteristics of PET and CT for whole-body MM bone lesion detection in a 3D manner. Two convolutional neural networks (CNNs), V-Net and W-Net, were adopted to segment and detect the lesions. The feasibility of deep learning for lesion detection on 68Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT was first verified on digital phantoms generated using realistic PET simulation methods. Then the proposed methods were evaluated on real 68Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT scans of MM patients. The preliminary results showed that deep learning method can leverage multimodal information for spatial feature representation, and W-Net obtained the best result for segmentation and lesion detection. It also outperformed traditional machine learning methods such as random forest classifier (RF), k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN), and support vector machine (SVM). The proof-of-concept study encourages further development of deep learning approach for MM lesion detection in population study.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29531504 PMCID: PMC5817261 DOI: 10.1155/2018/2391925
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging ISSN: 1555-4309 Impact factor: 3.161
Figure 1Properties of MM lesions of an exemplary patient with 68Ga-Pentixafor PET imaging: (a) maximum-intensity projection of 68Ga-Pentixafor PET; (b) histogram distribution of maximum activity of the lesions; (c) histogram distribution of mean activity of the lesions; (d) histogram distribution of volumes of the lesions.
Figure 2Overview of a simplified W-Net architecture.
Figure 3Synthetic PET data generating from digital phantom and its corresponding CT scan.
Figure 4Exemplary detection results of phantom study: (1) the original axial CT slices; (2) the corresponding PET slices; (3) MM lesion prediction using V-Net.
Experimental results of phantom study using synthetic PET/CT using V-Net, random forest (RF), k-Nearest Neighbor (k-NN), and support vector machine (SVM).
| Performance (%) | Sensitivity | Specificity | Precision | Dice |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V-Net | 89.71 | 99.68 | 88.82 | 89.26 |
| RF with | 99.16 | 89.49 | 12.18 | 21.69 |
| kNN with | 98.52 | 90.38 | 12.41 | 23.09 |
| SVM with | 98.76 | 92.15 | 15.60 | 26.94 |
Experimental results of V-Nets and W-Net for MM bone lesion detection. Best results are indicated in italic.
| Performance (%) | Sensitivity | Specificity | Precision | Dice |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V-Net + CT | 73.18 | 94.43 | 16.08 | 26.37 |
| V-Net + PET | 61.77 | 96.04 | 18.53 | 28.51 |
| V-Net + PET/CT | 71.06 | 99.51 | 68.00 | 69.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 5Exemplary detection results of V-Nets and W-Net: (1) the original axial CT slices; (2) the corresponding PET slices; (3) MM lesion prediction using CT alone in V-Net; (4) MM lesion prediction using PET alone in V-Net; (5) MM lesion prediction using PET/CT in V-Net; (6) MM lesion detection using W-Net.
Figure 6Convergence curves of different network architectures, W-Net (a) or V-Net (b).