Laboratory of Neuroimaging and Innovative Molecular Tracer, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
University of Cote d'Azur, Inria Sophia Antipolis, Epione Research Project, Nice, France.
Curr Alzheimer Res. 2020;17(13):1186-1194. doi: 10.2174/1567205018666210212162443.
Automated voxel-based analysis methods are used to detect cortical hypometabolism typical of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) on FDG-PET brain scans. We compared the accuracy of two clinically validated tools for their ability to identify those MCI subjects progressing to AD at followup, to evaluate the impact of the analysis method on FDG-PET diagnostic performance.
SPMGrid and BRASS (Hermes Medical Solutions, Stockholm, Sweden) were tested on 131 MCI and elderly healthy controls from the EADC PET dataset. The concordance between the tools was tested by correlating the quantitative parameters (z- and t-values), calculated by the two software tools, and by measuring the topographical overlap of the abnormal regions (Dice score). Three independent expert readers blindly assigned a diagnosis based on the two map sets. We used conversion to AD dementia as the gold standard.
The t-map and z-map calculated with SPMGrid and BRASS, respectively, showed a good correlation (R > .50) for the majority of individual cases (128/131) and for the majority of selected regions of interest (ROIs) (98/116). The overlap of the hypometabolic patterns from the two tools was, however, poor (Dice score .36). The diagnostic performance was comparable, with BRASS showing significantly higher sensitivity (.82 versus .59) and SPMGrid showing higher specificity (.87 versus .52).
Despite similar diagnostic performance in predicting conversion to AD in MCI subjects, the two tools showed significant differences, and the maps provided by the tools showed limited overlap. These results underline the urgency for standardization across FDG-PET analysis methods for their use in clinical practice.
基于体素的自动分析方法用于检测 FDG-PET 脑扫描中阿尔茨海默病(AD)的皮质代谢低下。我们比较了两种经过临床验证的工具的准确性,以评估其在随访中识别向 AD 进展的 MCI 患者的能力,从而评估分析方法对 FDG-PET 诊断性能的影响。
在 EADC PET 数据集的 131 名 MCI 和老年健康对照者中,测试了 SPMGrid 和 BRASS(Hermes Medical Solutions,斯德哥尔摩,瑞典)。通过比较两个软件工具计算的定量参数(z 值和 t 值)的相关性,以及通过测量异常区域的拓扑重叠(Dice 评分),来测试工具之间的一致性。三位独立的专家读者根据这两套图谱进行盲法诊断。我们将转化为 AD 痴呆作为金标准。
SPMGrid 和 BRASS 分别计算的 t 图和 z 图,在大多数个体病例(128/131)和大多数选定的感兴趣区域(ROI)(98/116)中,相关性良好(R>.50)。然而,两种工具的代谢低下模式的重叠很差(Dice 评分.36)。诊断性能相当,BRASS 的敏感性显著更高(.82 对.59),SPMGrid 的特异性更高(.87 对.52)。
尽管在预测 MCI 患者向 AD 转化方面,两种工具具有相似的诊断性能,但它们显示出显著差异,并且工具提供的图谱重叠有限。这些结果强调了在临床实践中使用 FDG-PET 分析方法进行标准化的紧迫性。