% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Debus:131500,
author = {C. Debus$^*$ and R. Floca$^*$ and D. Nörenberg and A.
Abdollahi$^*$ and M. Ingrisch},
title = {{I}mpact of fitting algorithms on errors of parameter
estimates in dynamic contrast-enhanced {MRI}.},
journal = {Physics in medicine and biology},
volume = {62},
number = {24},
issn = {1361-6560},
address = {Bristol},
publisher = {IOP Publ.},
reportid = {DKFZ-2017-06167},
pages = {9322 - 9340},
year = {2017},
abstract = {Parameter estimation in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE
MRI) is usually performed by non-linear least square (NLLS)
fitting of a pharmacokinetic model to a measured
concentration-time curve. The two-compartment exchange model
(2CXM) describes the compartments plasma and interstitial
volume and their exchange in terms of plasma flow and
capillary permeability. The model function can be defined by
either a system of two coupled differential equations or a
closed-form analytical solution. The aim of this study was
to compare these two representations in terms of accuracy,
robustness and computation speed, depending on parameter
combination and temporal sampling. The impact on parameter
estimation errors was investigated by fitting the 2CXM to
simulated concentration-time curves. Parameter combinations
representing five tissue types were used, together with two
arterial input functions, a measured and a theoretical
population based one, to generate 4D concentration images at
three different temporal resolutions. Images were fitted by
NLLS techniques, where the sum of squared residuals was
calculated by either numeric integration with the
Runge-Kutta method or convolution. Furthermore two example
cases, a prostate carcinoma and a glioblastoma multiforme
patient, were analyzed in order to investigate the validity
of our findings in real patient data. The convolution
approach yields improved results in precision and robustness
of determined parameters. Precision and stability are
limited in curves with low blood flow. The model parameter v
e shows great instability and little reliability in all
cases. Decreased temporal resolution results in significant
errors for the differential equation approach in several
curve types. The convolution excelled in computational speed
by three orders of magnitude. Uncertainties in parameter
estimation at low temporal resolution cannot be compensated
by usage of the differential equations. Fitting with the
convolution approach is superior in computational time, with
better stability and accuracy at the same time.},
cin = {E210 / E071 / L101},
ddc = {570},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)E210-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)E071-20160331 /
I:(DE-He78)L101-20160331},
pnm = {315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:28858856},
doi = {10.1088/1361-6560/aa8989},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/131500},
}