Citations

The Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance Profile for dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI and its longitudinal claims for the precision of a DSC MRI–derived quantitative imaging biomarker to assess the relative cerebral blood volume changes in gliomas are summarized.

BackgroundUncertainty regarding the reproducibility of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) hampers the use of quantitative diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) in evaluation of the prostate with magnetic resonance imaging MRI. The quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) profile for quantitative DWI claims a within‐subject coefficient of variation (wCV) for prostate lesion ADC of 0.17. Improved understanding of ADC reproducibility would aid the use of quantitative diffusion in prostate MRI evaluation.PurposeEvaluation of the repeatability (same‐day) and reproducibility (multi‐day) of whole‐prostate and focal‐lesion ADC assessment in a multi‐site setting.Study TypeProspective multi‐institutional.SubjectsTwenty‐nine males, ages 53 to 80 (median 63) years, following diagnosis of prostate cancer, 10 with focal lesions.Field Strength/Sequence3T, single‐shot spin‐echo diffusion‐weighted echo‐planar sequence with four b‐values.AssessmentSites qualified for the study using an ice‐water phantom with known ADC. Readers performed DWI analyses at visit 1 (“V1”) and visit 2 (“V2,” 2–14 days after V1), where V2 comprised scans before (“V2pre”) and after (“V2post”) a “coffee‐break” interval with subject removal and repositioning. A single reader segmented the whole prostate. Two readers separately placed region‐of‐interests for focal lesions.Statistical TestsReproducibility and repeatability coefficients for whole prostate and focal lesions derived from median pixel ADC. We estimated the wCV and 95% confidence interval using a variance stabilizing transformation and assessed interreader reliability of focal lesion ADC using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).ResultsThe ADC biases from b0–b600 and b0–b800 phantom scans averaged 1.32% and 1.44%, respectively; mean b‐value dependence was 0.188%. Repeatability and reproducibility of whole prostate median pixel ADC both yielded wCVs of 0.033 (N = 29). In 10 subjects with an evaluable focal lesion, the individual reader wCVs were 0.148 and 0.074 (repeatability) and 0.137 and 0.078 (reproducibility). All time points demonstrated good to excellent interreader reliability for focal lesion ADC (ICCV1 = 0.89; ICCV2pre = 0.76; ICCV2post = 0.94).Data ConclusionThis study met the QIBA claim for prostate ADC. Test–retest repeatability and multi‐day reproducibility were largely equivalent. Interreader reliability for focal lesion ADC was high across time points.Level of Evidence1Technical EfficacyStage 2TOC CategoryPelvis

On behalf of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM) Quantitative MR Study Group, this article provides an overview of considerations for the development, validation, qualification, and dissemination of quantitative MR (qMR) methods. This process is framed in terms of two central technical performance properties, i.e., bias and precision. Although qMR is confounded by undesired effects, methods with low bias and high precision can be iteratively developed and validated. For illustration, two distinct qMR methods are discussed throughout the manuscript: quantification of liver proton‐density fat fraction, and cardiacT1. These examples demonstrate the expansion of qMR methods from research centers toward widespread clinical dissemination. The overall goal of this article is to provide trainees, researchers, and clinicians with essential guidelines for the development and validation of qMR methods, as well as an understanding of necessary steps and potential pitfalls for the dissemination of quantitative MR in research and in the clinic.

Purpose A standard MRI system phantom has been designed and fabricated to assess scanner performance, stability, comparability and assess the accuracy of quantitative relaxation time imaging. The phantom is unique in having traceability to the International System of Units, a high level of precision, and monitoring by a national metrology institute. Here, we describe the phantom design, construction, imaging protocols, and measurement of geometric distortion, resolution, slice profile, signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), proton‐spin relaxation times, image uniformity and proton density. Methods The system phantom, designed by the International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine ad hoc committee on Standards for Quantitative MR, is a 200 mm spherical structure that contains a 57‐element fiducial array; two relaxation time arrays; a proton density/SNR array; resolution and slice‐profile insets. Standard imaging protocols are presented, which provide rapid assessment of geometric distortion, image uniformity, T 1 and T 2 mapping, image resolution, slice profile, and SNR. Results Fiducial array analysis gives assessment of intrinsic geometric distortions, which can vary considerably between scanners and correction techniques. This analysis also measures scanner/coil image uniformity, spatial calibration accuracy, and local volume distortion. An advanced resolution analysis gives both scanner and protocol contributions. SNR analysis gives both temporal and spatial contributions. Conclusions A standard system phantom is useful for characterization of scanner performance, monitoring a scanner over time, and to compare different scanners. This type of calibration structure is useful for quality assurance, benchmarking quantitative MRI protocols, and to transition MRI from a qualitative imaging technique to a precise metrology with documented accuracy and uncertainty.

Level of Evidence : 5 Technical Efficacy : Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.

The MRI community is using quantitative mapping techniques to complement qualitative imaging. For quantitative imaging to reach its full potential, it is necessary to analyze measurements across systems and longitudinally. Clinical use of quantitative imaging can be facilitated through adoption and use of a standard system phantom, a calibration/standard reference object, to assess the performance of an MRI machine. The International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine AdHoc Committee on Standards for Quantitative Magnetic Resonance was established in February 2007 to facilitate the expansion of MRI as a mainstream modality for multi‐institutional measurements, including, among other things, multicenter trials. The goal of the Standards for Quantitative Magnetic Resonance committee was to provide a framework to ensure that quantitative measures derived from MR data are comparable over time, between subjects, between sites, and between vendors. This paper, written by members of the Standards for Quantitative Magnetic Resonance committee, reviews standardization attempts and then details the need, requirements, and implementation plan for a standard system phantom for quantitative MRI. In addition, application‐specific phantoms and implementation of quantitative MRI are reviewed. Magn Reson Med 79:48–61, 2018. © 2017 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.