Theoretical study of penalized-likelihood image reconstruction for region of interest quantification

Region of interest (ROI) quantification is an important task in emission tomography (e.g., positron emission tomography and single photon emission computed tomography). It is essential for exploring clinical factors such as tumor activity, growth rate, and the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. Statistical image reconstruction methods based on the penalized maximum-likelihood (PML) or maximum a posteriori principle have been developed for emission tomography to deal with the low signal-to-noise ratio of the emission data. Similar to the filter cut-off frequency in the filtered backprojection method, the regularization parameter in PML reconstruction controls the resolution and noise tradeoff and, hence, affects ROI quantification. In this paper, we theoretically analyze the performance of ROI quantification in PML reconstructions. Building on previous work, we derive simplified theoretical expressions for the bias, variance, and ensemble mean-squared-error (EMSE) of the estimated total activity in an ROI that is surrounded by a uniform background. When the mean and covariance matrix of the activity inside the ROI are known, the theoretical expressions are readily computable and allow for fast evaluation of image quality for ROI quantification with different regularization parameters. The optimum regularization parameter can then be selected to minimize the EMSE. Computer simulations are conducted for small ROIs with variable uniform uptake. The results show that the theoretical predictions match the Monte Carlo results reasonably well.

[1]  Michael A. King,et al.  Optimization of estimator performance and comparison to human classification performance as applied to thoracic Ga-67 SPECT images , 2000, Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (Cat. No.00CH37143).

[2]  Anand Rangarajan,et al.  Bayesian image reconstruction in SPECT using higher order mechanical models as priors , 1995, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[3]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  A theoretical study of the contrast recovery and variance of MAP reconstructions from PET data , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[4]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Spatial resolution properties of penalized-likelihood image reconstruction: space-invariant tomographs , 1996, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[5]  Ken D. Sauer,et al.  A unified approach to statistical tomography using coordinate descent optimization , 1996, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[6]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Compensation for nonuniform resolution using penalized-likelihood reconstruction in space-variant imaging systems , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[7]  Donald W. Wilson,et al.  Noise properties of the EM algorithm. I. Theory , 1994 .

[8]  Charles L. Byrne,et al.  Noise characterization of block-iterative reconstruction algorithms. I. Theory , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[9]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  Observer signal-to-noise ratios for the ML-EM algorithm , 1996, Medical Imaging.

[10]  Jinyi Qi Investigation of lesion detection in MAP reconstruction with non-Gaussian priors , 2005, IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2005.

[11]  P A Salvadori,et al.  Role of 2-[18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the early assessment of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients. , 2000, Clinical breast cancer.

[12]  Jeffrey A. Fessler Penalized weighted least-squares image reconstruction for positron emission tomography , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[13]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Channelized hotelling observer performance for penalized-likelihood image reconstruction , 2002, 2002 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[14]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  Resolution and noise properties of MAP reconstruction for fully 3-D PET , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[15]  Peter J. Huber,et al.  Robust Statistics , 2005, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics.

[16]  Jinyi Qi Noise propagation in iterative reconstruction algorithms with line searches , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[17]  Jinyi Qi Analysis of lesion detectability in Bayesian emission reconstruction with nonstationary object variability , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[18]  Simon R. Cherry,et al.  Fast gradient-based methods for Bayesian reconstruction of transmission and emission PET images , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[19]  H. Malcolm Hudson,et al.  Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[20]  D. Rubin,et al.  Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM - algorithm plus discussions on the paper , 1977 .

[21]  Alfred O. Hero,et al.  Ieee Transactions on Image Processing: to Appear Penalized Maximum-likelihood Image Reconstruction Using Space-alternating Generalized Em Algorithms , 2022 .

[22]  Ronald H. Huesman,et al.  Theoretical study of lesion detectability of MAP reconstruction using computer observers , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[23]  J. Thie,et al.  The Potential of F-18-FDG PET in Breast Cancer. Detection of Primary Lesions, Axillary Lymph Node Metastases, or Distant Metastases. , 2000, Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T.

[24]  R. Huesman A new fast algorithm for the evaluation of regions of interest and statistical uncertainty in computed tomography. , 1984, Physics in medicine and biology.

[25]  J. Carreras,et al.  Early diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer with FDG-PET in patients with progressive elevation of serum tumor markers. , 2002, The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology.

[26]  Jinyi Qi,et al.  A unified noise analysis for iterative image estimation. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[27]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  Covariance approximation for fast and accurate computation of channelized Hotelling observer statistics , 1999, 1999 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record. 1999 Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (Cat. No.99CH37019).

[28]  L. Shepp,et al.  Maximum Likelihood Reconstruction for Emission Tomography , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[29]  R. Leahy,et al.  High-resolution 3D Bayesian image reconstruction using the microPET small-animal scanner. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[30]  H H Barrett,et al.  Objective assessment of image quality: effects of quantum noise and object variability. , 1990, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[31]  Yuxiang Xing,et al.  Rapid calculation of detectability in Bayesian single photon emission computed tomography. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[32]  Andrew Blake,et al.  Visual Reconstruction , 1987, Deep Learning for EEG-Based Brain–Computer Interfaces.

[33]  K. Lange,et al.  EM reconstruction algorithms for emission and transmission tomography. , 1984, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[34]  G. Gindi,et al.  Noise analysis of MAP-EM algorithms for emission tomography. , 1997, Physics in medicine and biology.

[35]  Jonathan M. Links,et al.  MR-Based Correction of Brain PET Measurements for Heterogeneous Gray Matter Radioactivity Distribution , 1996, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[36]  Jeffrey A. Fessler Mean and variance of implicitly defined biased estimators (such as penalized maximum likelihood): applications to tomography , 1996, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[37]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Regularization for uniform spatial resolution properties in penalized-likelihood image reconstruction , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[38]  Lale Kostakoglu,et al.  Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. , 2003, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.