Segmentation of Subtraction Images for the Measurement of Lesion Change in Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Lesion volume change (LVC) assessment is essential in monitoring MS progression. LVC is usually measured by independently segmenting serial MR imaging examinations. Subtraction imaging has been proposed for improved visualization and characterization of lesion change. We compare segmentation of subtraction images (SSEG) with serial single time-point conventional segmentation (CSEG) by assessing the LVC relationship to brain atrophy and disease duration, as well as scan-rescan reproducibility and annual rates of lesion accrual. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pairs of scans were acquired 1.5 to 4.7 years apart in 21 patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Scan-rescan MR images were acquired within 30 minutes in 10 patients with MS. LVC was measured with CSEG and SSEG after coregistration and normalization. Coefficient of variation (COV) and Bland-Altman analyses estimated method reproducibility. Spearman rank correlations probed associations between LVC and other measures. RESULTS: Atrophy rate and net LVC were associated for SSEG (R = −0.446; P < .05) but not when using CSEG (R = −0.180; P = .421). Disease duration did not show an association with net lesion volume change per year measured by CSEG (R = −0.360; P = .11) but showed an inverse correlation with SSEG-derived measurements (R = −0.508; P < .05). Scan-rescan COV was lower for SSEG (0.98% ± 1.55%) than for CSEG (8.64% ± 9.91%). CONCLUSION: SSEG unveiled a relationship between T2 LVC and concomitant brain atrophy and demonstrated significantly higher measurement reproducibility. SSEG, a promising tool providing detailed analysis of subtle alterations in lesion size and intensity, may provide critical outcome measures for clinical trials of novel treatments, and may provide further insight into progression patterns in MS.

[1]  R. Killiany,et al.  Quantitative follow‐up of patients with multiple sclerosis using MRI: Reproducibility , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[2]  D. Li,et al.  Interferon beta‐1b is effective in relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis , 1993, Neurology.

[3]  F. Jolesz,et al.  MRI contrast uptake in new lesions in relapsing-remitting MS followed at weekly intervals , 2003, Neurology.

[4]  R. Kikinis,et al.  Serial magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis: correlation with attacks, disability, and disease stage , 2000, Journal of Neuroimmunology.

[5]  K. Zou,et al.  Quantitative analysis of MRI signal abnormalities of brain white matter with high reproducibility and accuracy , 2002, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[6]  F Träber,et al.  Double inversion recovery brain imaging at 3T: diagnostic value in the detection of multiple sclerosis lesions. , 2007, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[7]  Frederik Barkhof,et al.  Intracortical lesions in multiple sclerosis: improved detection with 3D double inversion-recovery MR imaging. , 2005, Radiology.

[8]  M Rovaris,et al.  Short-term brain volume change in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: effect of glatiramer acetate and implications. , 2001, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[9]  Koen L. Vincken,et al.  Automatic segmentation of different-sized white matter lesions by voxel probability estimation , 2004, Medical Image Anal..

[10]  Saara Totterman,et al.  Accuracy and reproducibility of manual and semiautomated quantification of MS lesions by MRI , 2003, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[11]  G. Ebers,et al.  Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study of interferon β-1a in relapsing/remitting multiple sclerosis , 1998, The Lancet.

[12]  D. Paty,et al.  Interferon beta‐1b is effective in relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis , 1993, Neurology.

[13]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Spatial registration and normalization of images , 1995 .

[14]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Serial isotropic three-dimensional fast FLAIR imaging: using image registration and subtraction to reveal active multiple sclerosis lesions. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  D G Altman,et al.  Comparison of methods of measuring blood pressure. , 1986, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[16]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Gadolinium enhancement increases the sensitivity of MRI in detecting disease activity in multiple sclerosis. , 1993, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[17]  P M Matthews,et al.  Defining multiple sclerosis disease activity using MRI T2-weighted difference imaging. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[18]  G. Barker,et al.  Precision and reliability for measurement of change in MRI lesion volume in multiple sclerosis: a comparison of two computer assisted techniques , 1998, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[19]  Dominik S. Meier,et al.  Time-series analysis of MRI intensity patterns in multiple sclerosis , 2003, NeuroImage.

[20]  R Kikinis,et al.  Automatic identification of gray matter structures from MRI to improve the segmentation of white matter lesions. , 1995, Journal of image guided surgery.

[21]  H. Eskola,et al.  Computerised volumetric analysis of lesions in multiple sclerosis using new semi-automatic segmentation software , 2006, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[22]  Paul Ainsworth,et al.  In the short term , 2009 .

[23]  Frederik Barkhof,et al.  Human gray matter: feasibility of single-slab 3D double inversion-recovery high-spatial-resolution MR imaging. , 2006, Radiology.

[24]  Charles R G Guttmann,et al.  Can MRI reveal phenotypes of multiple sclerosis? , 2006, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[25]  F A Jolesz,et al.  Optimized single-slab three-dimensional spin-echo MR imaging of the brain. , 2000, Radiology.

[26]  Hans Lassmann,et al.  Cortical demyelination and diffuse white matter injury in multiple sclerosis. , 2005, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[27]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  MRI and PET Coregistration—A Cross Validation of Statistical Parametric Mapping and Automated Image Registration , 1997, NeuroImage.

[28]  J H Simon,et al.  Eight-year follow-up study of brain atrophy in patients with MS , 2002, Neurology.

[29]  Marco Rovaris,et al.  The effect of repositioning on brain MRI lesion load assessment in multiple sclerosis: reliability of subjective quality criteria , 1998, Journal of Neurology.

[30]  J. Duda,et al.  Brain atrophy in relapsing multiple sclerosis: relationship to relapses, EDSS, and treatment with interferon β-1a , 2000, Multiple sclerosis.

[31]  Massimo Filippi,et al.  Image registration and subtraction to detect active T2 lesions in MS: an interobserver study , 2002, Journal of Neurology.

[32]  Koen L. Vincken,et al.  Probabilistic segmentation of white matter lesions in MR imaging , 2004, NeuroImage.

[33]  R Kikinis,et al.  Serial neuropsychological assessment and magnetic resonance imaging analysis in multiple sclerosis. , 1997, Archives of neurology.

[34]  D. Miller,et al.  Lesion volume measurement in multiple sclerosis: How important is accurate repositioning? , 1996, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[35]  Ron Kikinis,et al.  Adaptive Template Moderated Spatially Varying Statistical Classification , 1998, MICCAI.

[36]  L. Kappos,et al.  The use of magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis treatment trials: power calculations for annual lesion load measurement , 2000, Journal of Neurology.

[37]  Iraj Derakhshan Improving hand function in chronic stroke: topography of the lesion and role of the corpus callosum. , 2003, Archives of neurology.