Detection of Volume-Changing Metastatic Brain Tumors on Longitudinal MRI Using a Semiautomated Algorithm Based on the Jacobian Operator Field

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Nussbaum ES,
   3. Djalilian HR,
   4. Cho KH, et al

   . Brain metastases: histology, multiplicity, surgery, and survival. Cancer 1996;78:1781–88 pmid:8859192

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Okunieff P,
   3. Schell MC,
   4. Ruo R, et al

   . Long-term management of patients with multiple brain metastases after shaped beam radiosurgery: case report and review of the literature. J Neurosurg 2004;101(suppl 3):46–12 doi:10.3171/jns.2004.101.supplement 3.0406 pmid:15537197

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Patchell RA,
   3. Tibbs PA,
   4. Walsh JW, et al

   . A randomized trial of surgery in the treatment of single metastases to the brain. N Engl J Med 1990;322:494–500 doi:10.1056/NEJM199002223220802 pmid:2405271

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Smith ML,
   3. Lee JY

   . Stereotactic radiosurgery in the management of brain metastasis. Neurosurg Focus 2007;22:1–8 doi:10.3171/foc.2007.22.6.7 pmid:17608358

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Patel SH,
   3. Robbins JR,
   4. Gore EM, et al

   ; Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology–Brain Metastases. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® follow-up and retreatment of brain metastases. Am J Clin Oncol 2012;35:302–06 doi:10.1097/COC.0b013e31824be246 pmid:22609733

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Kakeda S,
   3. Korogi Y,
   4. Hiai Y, et al

   . Detection of brain metastasis at 3T: comparison among SE, IR-FSE and 3D-GRE sequences. Eur Radiol 2007;17:2345–51 doi:10.1007/s00330-007-0599-9 pmid:17318603

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Prastawa M,
   3. Bullitt E,
   4. Moon N, et al

   . Automatic brain tumor segmentation by subject specific modification of atlas priors. Acad Radiol 2003;10:1341–48 doi:10.1016/S1076-6332(03)00506-3 pmid:14697002

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Loganathan AG,
   3. Chan MD,
   4. Alphonse N, et al

   . Clinical outcomes of brain metastases treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery with 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MRI-based treatment planning: have we finally optimised detection of occult brain metastases? J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2012;56:554–60 doi:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2012.02429.x pmid:23043576

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Ambrosini RD

   . Automated Detection and Growth Rate Determination of Metastatic Tumors in the Brain and Lungs [dissertation]. Rochester: University of Rochester; 2010:134
10. 10.↵
    2. Ambrosini RD,
    3. Wang P,
    4. O'Dell WG

    . Computer-aided detection of metastatic brain tumors using automated three-dimensional template matching. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;31:85–93 doi:10.1002/jmri.22009 pmid:20027576

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Farjam R,
    3. Parmar HA,
    4. Noll DC, et al

    . An approach for computer-aided detection of brain metastases in post-Gd T1-W MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:824–36 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2012.02.024 pmid:22521993

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Pérez-Ramírez Ú,
    3. Arana E,
    4. Moratal D

    . Computer-aided detection of brain metastases using a three-dimensional template-based matching algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 36th Annual International Conference of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Chicago, Illinois. August 26–30, 2014:2384–87
13. 13.↵
    2. Pérez-Ramírez Ú,
    3. Arana E,
    4. Moratal D

    . Brain metastases detection on MR by means of three-dimensional tumor-appearance template matching. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016;44:642–52 doi:10.1002/jmri.25207 pmid:26934581

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Yang S,
    3. Nam Y,
    4. Kim MO, et al

    . Computer-aided detection of metastatic brain tumors using magnetic resonance black-blood imaging. Invest Radiol 2013;48:113–19 doi:10.1097/RLI.0b013e318277f078 pmid:23211553

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Durrleman S,
    2. Fletcher T,
    3. Gerig G,
    4. Niethammer M

    2. Chitphakdithai N,
    3. Chiang VL,
    4. Duncan JS

    . Tracking metastatic brain tumors in longitudinal scans via joint image registration and labeling. In: Durrleman S, Fletcher T, Gerig G, Niethammer M, eds. Spatio-temporal Image Analysis for Longitudinal and Time-Series Image Data: STIA 2012. Berlin: Springer; 2012:124–36
16. 16.↵
    2. Patriarche J,
    3. Erickson B

    . A review of the automated detection of change in serial imaging studies of the brain. J Digit Imaging 2004;17:158–74 doi:10.1007/s10278-004-1010-x pmid:15534751

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Doi K

    . Computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging: historical review, current status and future potential. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2007;31:198–211 doi:10.1016/j.compmedimag.2007.02.002 pmid:17349778

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Doi K

    . Diagnostic imaging over the last 50 years: research and development in medical imaging science and technology. Phys Med Biol 2006;51:R5–27 doi:10.1088/0031-9155/51/13/R02 pmid:16790920

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Takahashi R,
    3. Kajikawa Y

    . Computer-aided diagnosis: a survey with bibliometric analysis. Int J Med Inform 2017;101:58–67 doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.004 pmid:28347448

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Lladó X,
    3. Ganiler O,
    4. Oliver A, et al

    . Automated detection of multiple sclerosis lesions in serial brain MRI. Neuroradiology 2012;54:787–807 doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0992-6 pmid:22179659

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Martola J,
    3. Bergström J,
    4. Fredrikson S, et al

    . A longitudinal observational study of brain atrophy rate reflecting four decades of multiple sclerosis: a comparison of serial 1D, 2D, and volumetric measurements from MRI images. Neuroradiology 2010;52:109–17 doi:10.1007/s00234-009-0593-9 pmid:19774369

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Tian W,
    3. Zhu T,
    4. Zhong J, et al

    . Progressive decline in fractional anisotropy on serial DTI examinations of the corpus callosum: a putative marker of disease activity and progression in SPMS. Neuroradiology 2012;54:287–97 doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0885-8 pmid:21567135

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Calcagno G,
    3. Staiano A,
    4. Fortunato G, et al

    . A multilayer perceptron neural network-based approach for the identification of responsiveness to interferon therapy in multiple sclerosis patients. Information Sciences 2010;180:4153–63 doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.07.004

    CrossRef
24. 24.↵
    2. Südmeyer M,
    3. Pieperhoff P,
    4. Ferrea S, et al

    . Longitudinal deformation-based morphometry reveals spatio-temporal dynamics of brain volume changes in patients with corticobasal syndrome. PLoS One 2012;7:e41873 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041873 pmid:22848644

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Durand-Dubief F,
    3. Belaroussi B,
    4. Armspach J, et al

    . Reliability of longitudinal brain volume loss measurements between 2 sites in patients with multiple sclerosis: comparison of 7 quantification techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1918–24 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3107 pmid:22790248

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Fuentes D,
    3. Contreras J,
    4. Yu J, et al

    . Morphometry-based measurements of the structural response to whole-brain radiation. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2015;10:393–401 doi:10.1007/s11548-014-1128-3 pmid:25408306

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Unay D

    . Local and global volume changes of subcortical brain structures from longitudinally varying neuroimaging data for dementia identification. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2012;36:464–73 doi:10.1016/j.compmedimag.2012.03.006 pmid:22658230

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Thirion JP,
    3. Calmon G

    . Deformation analysis to detect and quantify active lesions in three-dimensional medical image sequences. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1999;18:429–41 doi:10.1109/42.774170 pmid:10416804

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Höhne KH,
    2. Kinikis R

    2. Davatzikos C,
    3. Vaillant M,
    4. Resnick S, et al

    . Morphological analysis of brain structures using spatial normalization. In: Höhne KH, Kinikis R. Visualization in Biomedical Computing: 4th International Conference, VBC ‘96, Hamburg, Germany, September 22–25, 1996: Proceedings. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1996:355–60
30. 30.↵
    2. Rey D,
    3. Subsol G,
    4. Delingette H, et al

    . Automatic detection and segmentation of evolving processes in 3D medical images: application to multiple sclerosis. Med Image Anal 2002;6:163–79 doi:10.1016/S1361-8415(02)00056-7 pmid:12045002

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Evans AC,
    3. Collins DL,
    4. Mills S, et al

    . 3D statistical neuroanatomical models from 305 MRI volumes. In: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences Society. Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, 1993; 1993 IEEE Conference Record. Piscataway: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 1993:1813–17
32. 32.↵
    2. Ashburner J,
    3. Friston KJ

    . Unified segmentation. Neuroimage 2005;26:839–51 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.018 pmid:15955494

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 33.↵
    2. Ashburner J,
    3. Barnes G,
    4. Chen C, et al

    . SPM12 Manual. London: Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging; 2016
34. 34.↵
    2. Ashburner J,
    3. Ridgway GR

    . Symmetric diffeomorphic modeling of longitudinal structural MRI. Front Neurosci 2012;6:197 doi:10.3389/fnins.2012.00197 pmid:23386806

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    2. Seghier ML,
    3. Ramlackhansingh A,
    4. Crinion J, et al

    . Lesion identification using unified segmentation-normalisation models and fuzzy clustering. Neuroimage 2008;41:1253–66 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.028 pmid:18482850

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
36. 36.↵
    2. Greiner M,
    3. Pfeiffer D,
    4. Smith R

    . Principles and practical application of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Prev Vet Med 2000;45:23–41 doi:10.1016/S0167-5877(00)00115-X pmid:10802332

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    2. Hanley JA,
    3. McNeil BJ

    . The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29–36 doi:10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 pmid:7063747

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. 38.↵
    2. Miller RG

    . The jackknife–a review. Biometrika 1974;61:1–15

    CrossRefWeb of Science
39. 39.↵
    2. Cabezas M,
    3. Corral J,
    4. Oliver A, et al

    . Improved automatic detection of new T2 lesions in multiple sclerosis using deformation fields. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016 Jun 9. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4829 pmid:27282863

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
40. 40.↵
    1. Wells WM,
    2. Colchester AC,
    3. Delp S

    2. Frangi AF,
    3. Niessen WJ,
    4. Vincken KL, et al

    . Multiscale vessel enhancement filtering. In: Wells WM, Colchester AC, Delp S. Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Interventation: MICCAI'9. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1998:130–37
41. 41.↵
    2. Li Q,
    3. Sone S,
    4. Doi K

    . Selective enhancement filters for nodules, vessels, and airway walls in two- and three-dimensional CT scans. Med Phys 2003;30:2040–51 doi:10.1118/1.1581411 pmid:12945970

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    2. Forkert N,
    3. Fiehler J,
    4. Suniaga S, et al

    . A statistical cerebroarterial atlas derived from 700 MRA datasets. Methods Inf Med 2013;52:467–74 doi:10.3414/ME13-02-0001 pmid:24190179

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    2. Park J,
    3. Kim EY

    . Contrast-enhanced, three-dimensional, whole-brain, black-blood imaging: application to small brain metastases. Magn Reson Med 2010;63:553–61 doi:10.1002/mrm.22261 pmid:20187162

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
44. 44.↵
    2. Park J,
    3. Kim J,
    4. Yoo E, et al

    . Detection of small metastatic brain tumors: comparison of 3D contrast-enhanced whole-brain black-blood imaging and MP-RAGE imaging. Invest Radiol 2012;47:136–41 doi:10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182319704 pmid:22104961

    CrossRefPubMed