The Utah PET lesion detection database

Task-based assessment of image quality is a challenging but necessary step in evaluating advancements in PET instrumentation, algorithms, and processing. We have been developing methods of evaluating observer performance for detecting and localizing focal warm lesions using experimentally-acquired whole-body phantom data designed to mimic oncologic FDG PET imaging. This work describes a new resource of experimental phantom data that is being developed to facilitate lesion detection studies for the evaluation of PET reconstruction algorithms and related developments. A new large custom-designed thorax phantom has been constructed to complement our existing medium thorax phantom, providing two whole-body setups for lesion detection experiments. The new phantom is ~50% larger and has a removable spine/rib-cage attenuating structure that is held in place with low water resistance open cell foam. Several series of experiments have been acquired, with more ongoing, including both 2D and fully-3D acquisitions on tomographs from multiple vendors, various phantom configurations and lesion distributions. All raw data, normalizations, and calibrations are collected and offloaded to the database, enabling subsequent retrospective offline reconstruction with research software for various applications. The offloaded data are further processed to identify the true lesion locations in preparation for use with both human observers and numerical studies using the channelized non-prewhitened observer. These data have been used to study the impact of improved statistical algorithms, point spread function modeling, and time-of-flight measurements upon focal lesion detection performance, and studies on the effects of accelerated block-iterative algorithms and advanced regularization techniques are currently ongoing. Interested researchers are encouraged to contact the author regarding potential collaboration and application of database experiments to their projects.

[1]  R. Swensson Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images. , 1996, Medical physics.

[2]  Lucretiu M Popescu,et al.  Nonparametric ROC and LROC analysis. , 2007, Medical physics.

[3]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Foundations of Image Science , 2003, J. Electronic Imaging.

[4]  Andrew J. Reader,et al.  Impact of Image-Space Resolution Modeling for Studies with the High-Resolution Research Tomograph , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[5]  H H Barrett,et al.  Hotelling trace criterion and its correlation with human-observer performance. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[6]  T.G. Turkington,et al.  Small spheres for lesion detection phantoms , 2001, 2001 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (Cat. No.01CH37310).

[7]  H.C. Gifford,et al.  Evaluation of multiclass model observers in PET LROC studies , 2004, IEEE Symposium Conference Record Nuclear Science 2004..

[8]  F E Boada,et al.  Fast three dimensional sodium imaging , 1997, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[9]  Ganesh Adluru,et al.  Constrained Reconstruction of Sparse Cardiac MR DTI Data , 2007, FIMH.

[10]  D. Townsend,et al.  The Theory and Practice of 3D PET , 1998, Developments in Nuclear Medicine.

[11]  Rik Van de Walle,et al.  Correction for external LOR effects in listmode reconstruction for PET , 2002, Proceedings IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging.

[12]  Eric C Frey,et al.  Assessment of scatter compensation strategies for (67)Ga SPECT using numerical observers and human LROC studies. , 2004, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[13]  P. Roemer,et al.  The NMR phased array , 1990, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  K. Erlandsson,et al.  Fast accurate iterative reconstruction for low-statistics positron volume imaging. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  Dan J Kadrmas,et al.  LOR-OSEM: statistical PET reconstruction from raw line-of-response histograms , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  W. W. Moses,et al.  List-mode maximum-likelihood reconstruction applied to positron emission mammography (PEM) with irregular sampling , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[17]  S S Gambhir,et al.  ROC and localization ROC analyses of lesion detection in whole-body FDG PET: effects of acquisition mode, attenuation correction and reconstruction algorithm. , 1999, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[18]  Dan J Kadrmas,et al.  Comparative evaluation of lesion detectability for 6 PET imaging platforms using a highly reproducible whole-body phantom with (22)Na lesions and localization ROC analysis. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  Michel Defrise,et al.  Data Acquisition and Image Reconstruction for 3D PET , 1998 .

[21]  Christophe Deroose,et al.  Performance of MAP Reconstruction for Hot Lesion Detection in Whole-Body PET/CT: An Evaluation With Human and Numerical Observers , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[22]  D. Townsend,et al.  Impact of Time-of-Flight on PET Tumor Detection , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[23]  Rolf Clackdoyle,et al.  Cone-beam reconstruction using the backprojection of locally filtered projections , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[24]  3 D Phase Sensitive B 1 Mapping , 2009 .

[25]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Model observers for assessment of image quality , 1993 .

[26]  Maurizio Conti,et al.  Experimental comparison of lesion detectability for four fully-3D PET reconstruction schemes , 2007, 2007 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[27]  R G Swensson,et al.  Using Localization Data from Image Interpretations to Improve Estimates of Performance Accuracy , 2000, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[28]  M.E. Casey,et al.  A /sup 68/Ge PET hot-sphere phantom with no cold shells , 2005, IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2005.

[29]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  Comparison of 3D-OP-OSEM and 3D-FBP reconstruction algorithms for High-Resolution Research Tomograph studies: effects of randoms estimation methods , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[30]  Michael A. King,et al.  LROC analysis of detector-response compensation in SPECT , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[31]  Michael A. King,et al.  Single-slice versus multi-slice display for human-observer lesion-detection studies , 1999 .

[32]  H H Barrett,et al.  Addition of a channel mechanism to the ideal-observer model. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[33]  Dwight G Nishimura,et al.  Design and analysis of a practical 3D cones trajectory , 2006, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[34]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.