ABSTRACT
We investigated the effectiveness of the most commonly used registration methods (deformable and rigid-body registrations) with different reference images on pharmacokinetic parameters estimated from dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) of esophageal cancer patients. We obtained DCE-MRI images from 10 patients with esophageal cancer. Both rigid-body and deformable registrations of the images were performed on DCE-MRI images at different time points as reference images before the pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated. The deformable registration used non-rigid B-spline transforms in a multi-resolution scheme, and Euler transform were used for the rigid body registration. A nonparametric statistical test and the intra-class correlation coefficient assessed the consistency and reproducibility of the pharmacokinetic parameters estimated with both registration methods and using images acquired at different time points. Kruskal-Wallis testing demonstrated significant differences (p < 0.05) in all the estimated parameters for deformable registration but no significant differences (p > 0.78) for rigid-body registration. The intra-class correlation coefficient for rigid-body registration was higher than that for deformable registration for each pharmacokinetic parameter, indicating that, for rigid-body registration, the parameter values from different reference images of one patient tended to be similar to each other. In contrast, the values for deformable registration were more variable. In conclusion, the choice of the reference image of deformable registration significantly affected the estimates of pharmacokinetic parameters, and rigid-body registration showed small variations in pharmacokinetic parameters over the choice of the reference images for small motion artifacts of small distal esophageal cancer on DCE-MRI.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
