Article

Multimodal wavelet embedding representation for data combination (MaWERiC): integrating magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for prostate cancer detection

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
NMR in Biomedicine (Impact Factor: 3.56). 04/2012; 25(4):607-19. DOI: 10.1002/nbm.1777
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recently, both Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging (MRI) and Spectroscopy (MRS) have emerged as promising tools for detection of prostate cancer (CaP). However, due to the inherent dimensionality differences in MR imaging and spectral information, quantitative integration of T(2) weighted MRI (T(2)w MRI) and MRS for improved CaP detection has been a major challenge. In this paper, we present a novel computerized decision support system called multimodal wavelet embedding representation for data combination (MaWERiC) that employs, (i) wavelet theory to extract 171 Haar wavelet features from MRS and 54 Gabor features from T(2)w MRI, (ii) dimensionality reduction to individually project wavelet features from MRS and T(2)w MRI into a common reduced Eigen vector space, and (iii), a random forest classifier for automated prostate cancer detection on a per voxel basis from combined 1.5 T in vivo MRI and MRS. A total of 36 1.5 T endorectal in vivo T(2)w MRI and MRS patient studies were evaluated per voxel by MaWERiC using a three-fold cross validation approach over 25 iterations. Ground truth for evaluation of results was obtained by an expert radiologist annotations of prostate cancer on a per voxel basis who compared each MRI section with corresponding ex vivo wholemount histology sections with the disease extent mapped out on histology. Results suggest that MaWERiC based MRS T(2)w meta-classifier (mean AUC, μ = 0.89 ± 0.02) significantly outperformed (i) a T(2)w MRI (using wavelet texture features) classifier (μ = 0.55 ± 0.02), (ii) a MRS (using metabolite ratios) classifier (μ = 0.77 ± 0.03), (iii) a decision fusion classifier obtained by combining individual T(2)w MRI and MRS classifier outputs (μ = 0.85 ± 0.03), and (iv) a data combination method involving a combination of metabolic MRS and MR signal intensity features (μ = 0.66 ± 0.02).

Full-text

Available from: Anant Madabhushi, Jun 02, 2015
4 Followers
 · 
209 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is a renewed interest in MR-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) as a minimally invasive alternative to craniotomy for local treatment of various brain tumors and epilepsy. LITT allows for focused delivery of laser energy monitored in real time by MRI, for precise ablation of the lesion. Although highly promising, the long-term effects of laser ablation as a viable treatment option for neurological disorders have yet to be rigorously studied and quantified. In this work, we present a quantitative framework for monitoring per-voxel thermal-induced changes post-LITT over time on multi parametric MRI. We demonstrate that voxel-by-voxel quantification of MRI markers over time can enable a careful and accurate (a) characterization of early LITT-related changes (if and when they are exaggerated and when they subside), and (b) identification and monitoring of MRI markers that potentially allow for better quantification of response to LITT therapy. The framework was evaluated on two distinct cohorts of patients (GBM, epilepsy), who were monitored post-LITT at regular time-intervals via multi-parametric MRI. On a cohort of six GBM studies we found that (a) it may be important for the initial treatment-related changes to subside to more reliably capture MRI markers relating to tumor recurrence, and (b) T1w MRI and T2-GRE may better differentiate changes that may correspond to tumor recurrence from patients with no recurrence, as compared to T2w-MRI, and FLAIR. Similarly, our preliminary analysis of four epilepsy studies suggests that (a) early LITT changes (attributed to swelling, edema) appear to subside within 4-weeks post-LITT, and (b) ADC may be more reflective of early treatment changes (up to 1 month), while T1w may be more reflective of early delayed treatment changes (1 month, 3 months), while T2-w and T2-FLAIR appeared to be more sensitive to late treatment related changes (6-months post-LITT) compared to the other MRI protocols under evaluation.
    PLoS ONE 12/2014; 9(12):e114293. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0114293 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men in the United States. In this paper, we survey computer aided-diagnosis (CADx) systems that use multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) for detection and diagnosis of prostate cancer. We review and list mainstream techniques that are commonly utilized in image segmentation, registration, feature extraction, and classification. The performances of 15 state-of-the-art prostate CADx systems are compared through the area under their receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Challenges and potential directions to further the research of prostate CADx are discussed in this paper. Further improvements should be investigated to make prostate CADx systems useful in clinical practice.
    BioMed Research International 12/2014; 2014:789561. DOI:10.1155/2014/789561 · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy is the current gold standard for prostate cancer diagnosis. However, up to 40% of prostate cancer lesions appears isoechoic on TRUS. Hence, TRUS-guided biopsy has a high false negative rate for prostate cancer diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is better able to distinguish prostate cancer from benign tissue. However, MRI-guided biopsy requires special equipment and training and a longer procedure time. MRI-TRUS fusion, where MRI is acquired preoperatively and then aligned to TRUS, allows for advantages of both modalities to be leveraged during biopsy. MRI-TRUS-guided biopsy increases the yield of cancer positive biopsies. In this work, the authors present multiattribute probabilistic postate elastic registration (MAPPER) to align prostate MRI and TRUS imagery. MAPPER involves (1) segmenting the prostate on MRI, (2) calculating a multiattribute probabilistic map of prostate location on TRUS, and (3) maximizing overlap between the prostate segmentation on MRI and the multiattribute probabilistic map on TRUS, thereby driving registration of MRI onto TRUS. MAPPER represents a significant advancement over the current state-of-the-art as it requires no user interaction during the biopsy procedure by leveraging texture and spatial information to determine the prostate location on TRUS. Although MAPPER requires manual interaction to segment the prostate on MRI, this step is performed prior to biopsy and will not substantially increase biopsy procedure time. MAPPER was evaluated on 13 patient studies from two independent datasets-Dataset 1 has 6 studies acquired with a side-firing TRUS probe and a 1.5 T pelvic phased-array coil MRI; Dataset 2 has 7 studies acquired with a volumetric end-firing TRUS probe and a 3.0 T endorectal coil MRI. MAPPER has a root-mean-square error (RMSE) for expert selected fiducials of 3.36 ± 1.10 mm for Dataset 1 and 3.14 ± 0.75 mm for Dataset 2. State-of-the-art MRI-TRUS fusion methods report RMSE of 3.06-2.07 mm. MAPPER aligns MRI and TRUS imagery without manual intervention ensuring efficient, reproducible registration. MAPPER has a similar RMSE to state-of-the-art methods that require manual intervention.
    Medical Physics 03/2015; 42(3):1153. DOI:10.1118/1.4905104 · 3.01 Impact Factor