Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom

Siria Pasini; Steffen Ringgaard; Tau Vendelboe; Leyre Garcia-Ruiz; Anika Strittmatter; Giulia Villa; Anish Raj; Rebeca Echeverria-Chasco; Michela Bozzetto; Paolo Brambilla; Malene Aastrup; Esben S.S. Hansen; Luisa Pierotti; Matteo Renzulli; Susan T. Francis; Frank G. Zoellner; Christoffer Laustsen; Maria A. Fernandez-Seara; Anna Caroli

doi:10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0

Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom

Siria Pasini, Steffen Ringgaard, Tau Vendelboe, Leyre Garcia-Ruiz, Anika Strittmatter, Giulia Villa, Anish Raj, Rebeca Echeverria-Chasco, Michela Bozzetto, Paolo Brambilla, Malene Aastrup, Esben S.S. Hansen, Luisa Pierotti, Matteo Renzulli, Susan T. Francis, Frank G. Zoellner, Christoffer Laustsen, Maria A. Fernandez-Seara, Anna Caroli^*

^*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Institut for Klinisk Medicin - MR Forskningscentret

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › peer review

1 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To validate multi-site and multi-vendor ADC measurements using the QIBA/NIST diffusion MRI phantom at room temperature. Materials and methods: ADC measurements were performed on 12 scanners (evenly split between 1.5 and 3 T) from three vendors at five sites and compared with reference values at room temperature. We adopted Pearson’s correlation (r) and accuracy error for comparison with reference values; within scanner coefficient of variation (CV_intra%) for intra-session repeatability and inter-scanner for agreement (CV_inter%); Bland–Altman plots and precision error for short-term reproducibility; generalized linear mixed models and post-hoc tests (α=0.05) to compare accuracy, repeatability and precision across field strengths, vendors, and scanners. Results: Temperature adjusted ADCs were well correlated with NIST reference values (r≥ 0.997 for 1.5 T, r≥ 0.996 for 3 T). Median accuracy error was lower than 5% for all scanners. In the renal physiologic range (ADC > 0.83 × 10⁻³ mm²/s), accuracy error was < 10% and CV_intra < 2%. Across all scanners, good short-term reproducibility with limits of agreement < 10% and excellent agreement (median CV_inter < 2%) were found. Discussion: Despite using abdominal receive coils and room temperature measurements, all quantitative parameters were within literature findings. High accuracy, repeatability and precision within the renal physiologic range support the feasibility of scanner evaluation using QIBA standardization process for diffusion measurements in renal studies.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Artikelnummer	e1002203
Tidsskrift	Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine
ISSN	0968-5243
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0
Status	Accepteret/In press - 9 maj 2025

Adgang til dokumentet

10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0

Andre filer og links

Link to publication in Scopus

Citationsformater

Pasini, S., Ringgaard, S., Vendelboe, T., Garcia-Ruiz, L., Strittmatter, A., Villa, G., Raj, A., Echeverria-Chasco, R., Bozzetto, M., Brambilla, P., Aastrup, M., Hansen, E. S. S., Pierotti, L., Renzulli, M., Francis, S. T., Zoellner, F. G., Laustsen, C., Fernandez-Seara, M. A., & Caroli, A. (Accepteret/In press). Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom. Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, Artikel e1002203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0

@article{e7cee3cd8504427599e54f1b648204ee,

title = "Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom",

abstract = "Objective: To validate multi-site and multi-vendor ADC measurements using the QIBA/NIST diffusion MRI phantom at room temperature. Materials and methods: ADC measurements were performed on 12 scanners (evenly split between 1.5 and 3 T) from three vendors at five sites and compared with reference values at room temperature. We adopted Pearson{\textquoteright}s correlation (r) and accuracy error for comparison with reference values; within scanner coefficient of variation (CVintra%) for intra-session repeatability and inter-scanner for agreement (CVinter%); Bland–Altman plots and precision error for short-term reproducibility; generalized linear mixed models and post-hoc tests (α=0.05) to compare accuracy, repeatability and precision across field strengths, vendors, and scanners. Results: Temperature adjusted ADCs were well correlated with NIST reference values (r≥ 0.997 for 1.5 T, r≥ 0.996 for 3 T). Median accuracy error was lower than 5% for all scanners. In the renal physiologic range (ADC > 0.83 × 10−3 mm2/s), accuracy error was < 10% and CVintra < 2%. Across all scanners, good short-term reproducibility with limits of agreement < 10% and excellent agreement (median CVinter < 2%) were found. Discussion: Despite using abdominal receive coils and room temperature measurements, all quantitative parameters were within literature findings. High accuracy, repeatability and precision within the renal physiologic range support the feasibility of scanner evaluation using QIBA standardization process for diffusion measurements in renal studies.",

keywords = "Apparent diffusion coefficient, MRI, Multi-site, Phantom, Standardization",

author = "Siria Pasini and Steffen Ringgaard and Tau Vendelboe and Leyre Garcia-Ruiz and Anika Strittmatter and Giulia Villa and Anish Raj and Rebeca Echeverria-Chasco and Michela Bozzetto and Paolo Brambilla and Malene Aastrup and Hansen, {Esben S.S.} and Luisa Pierotti and Matteo Renzulli and Francis, {Susan T.} and Zoellner, {Frank G.} and Christoffer Laustsen and Fernandez-Seara, {Maria A.} and Anna Caroli",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2025.",

year = "2025",

month = may,

day = "9",

doi = "10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0",

language = "English",

journal = "Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine",

issn = "0968-5243",

publisher = "Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH",

}

Pasini, S , Ringgaard, S , Vendelboe, T, Garcia-Ruiz, L, Strittmatter, A, Villa, G, Raj, A, Echeverria-Chasco, R, Bozzetto, M, Brambilla, P, Aastrup, M , Hansen, ESS, Pierotti, L, Renzulli, M, Francis, ST, Zoellner, FG, Laustsen, C, Fernandez-Seara, MA & Caroli, A 2025, 'Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom', Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0

Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom. / Pasini, Siria ; Ringgaard, Steffen ; Vendelboe, Tau et al.
I: Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, 09.05.2025.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › peer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1)

T2 - apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom

AU - Pasini, Siria

AU - Ringgaard, Steffen

AU - Vendelboe, Tau

AU - Garcia-Ruiz, Leyre

AU - Strittmatter, Anika

AU - Villa, Giulia

AU - Raj, Anish

AU - Echeverria-Chasco, Rebeca

AU - Bozzetto, Michela

AU - Brambilla, Paolo

AU - Aastrup, Malene

AU - Hansen, Esben S.S.

AU - Pierotti, Luisa

AU - Renzulli, Matteo

AU - Francis, Susan T.

AU - Zoellner, Frank G.

AU - Laustsen, Christoffer

AU - Fernandez-Seara, Maria A.

AU - Caroli, Anna

PY - 2025/5/9

Y1 - 2025/5/9

N2 - Objective: To validate multi-site and multi-vendor ADC measurements using the QIBA/NIST diffusion MRI phantom at room temperature. Materials and methods: ADC measurements were performed on 12 scanners (evenly split between 1.5 and 3 T) from three vendors at five sites and compared with reference values at room temperature. We adopted Pearson’s correlation (r) and accuracy error for comparison with reference values; within scanner coefficient of variation (CVintra%) for intra-session repeatability and inter-scanner for agreement (CVinter%); Bland–Altman plots and precision error for short-term reproducibility; generalized linear mixed models and post-hoc tests (α=0.05) to compare accuracy, repeatability and precision across field strengths, vendors, and scanners. Results: Temperature adjusted ADCs were well correlated with NIST reference values (r≥ 0.997 for 1.5 T, r≥ 0.996 for 3 T). Median accuracy error was lower than 5% for all scanners. In the renal physiologic range (ADC > 0.83 × 10−3 mm2/s), accuracy error was < 10% and CVintra < 2%. Across all scanners, good short-term reproducibility with limits of agreement < 10% and excellent agreement (median CVinter < 2%) were found. Discussion: Despite using abdominal receive coils and room temperature measurements, all quantitative parameters were within literature findings. High accuracy, repeatability and precision within the renal physiologic range support the feasibility of scanner evaluation using QIBA standardization process for diffusion measurements in renal studies.

AB - Objective: To validate multi-site and multi-vendor ADC measurements using the QIBA/NIST diffusion MRI phantom at room temperature. Materials and methods: ADC measurements were performed on 12 scanners (evenly split between 1.5 and 3 T) from three vendors at five sites and compared with reference values at room temperature. We adopted Pearson’s correlation (r) and accuracy error for comparison with reference values; within scanner coefficient of variation (CVintra%) for intra-session repeatability and inter-scanner for agreement (CVinter%); Bland–Altman plots and precision error for short-term reproducibility; generalized linear mixed models and post-hoc tests (α=0.05) to compare accuracy, repeatability and precision across field strengths, vendors, and scanners. Results: Temperature adjusted ADCs were well correlated with NIST reference values (r≥ 0.997 for 1.5 T, r≥ 0.996 for 3 T). Median accuracy error was lower than 5% for all scanners. In the renal physiologic range (ADC > 0.83 × 10−3 mm2/s), accuracy error was < 10% and CVintra < 2%. Across all scanners, good short-term reproducibility with limits of agreement < 10% and excellent agreement (median CVinter < 2%) were found. Discussion: Despite using abdominal receive coils and room temperature measurements, all quantitative parameters were within literature findings. High accuracy, repeatability and precision within the renal physiologic range support the feasibility of scanner evaluation using QIBA standardization process for diffusion measurements in renal studies.

KW - Apparent diffusion coefficient

KW - MRI

KW - Multi-site

KW - Phantom

KW - Standardization

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105004446179&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0

DO - 10.1007/s10334-025-01256-0

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 40343571

AN - SCOPUS:105004446179

SN - 0968-5243

JO - Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine

JF - Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine

M1 - e1002203

ER -

Multi-center and multi-vendor evaluation study across 1.5 T and 3 T scanners (part 1): apparent diffusion coefficient standardization in a diffusion MRI phantom

Abstract

Adgang til dokumentet

Andre filer og links

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater