Muhammad Jamal Afridi1, Arun Ross2, and Erik M Shapiro3
1Department of Radiology, Department of Computer Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States, 2Department of Computer Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States, 3Department of Radiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United States
Synopsis
We describe an image analysis strategy for quantifying the location and number of transplanted stem cells from MRI images. MRI-based single cell detection facilitates the use of machine learning algorithms for spot detection. Using convolutional neural networks, automatic and intelligent cell enumeration was first developed on in vitro agarose samples containing a known number of labeled cell mimics. Then, the validated image analysis approach was used to quantify stem cell transplants in rodent brains. An accuracy of 99.8% was achieved on in vitro samples and 94.6% on in vivo examples.Introduction
Stem cell transplants
are in clinical trials for treating or slowing a myriad of diseases. Determining the location and number of transplanted cells, both directly and
serially after delivery, will be crucial for monitoring treatment success. MRI-based single cell detection can enable this. To achieve
single cell detection by MRI, cells are labeled with superparamagnetic iron
oxide particles causing punctate hypointensities (spots) in
T
2*-weighted MRI. Manual enumeration of these cells in 3D MRI is a tedious and inefficient task that is prone to subjectivity
and inaccuracy. This is one key obstacle in quantifying in vivo cell number folloiwng transplant. Unfortunately, there is no commercial tool to
automatically and accurately detect, locate and quantify transplanted cells. Therefore,
we developed a machine learning based automatic strategy that
intelligently quantifies cells in an MRI with an accuracy of 99.8%
in vitro and
94.6%
in vivo. To demonstrate accuracy and
reliability, we evaluated our strategy under a diverse set of 34 testing
conditions. Based on our detailed evaluation and its comparison with previous state-of-the-art,
this is the most accurate cell quantification approach yet reported.
MRI Methods and Development of Machine Learning Approach
The workflow was to develop and evaluate the machine learning approach on well defined in vitro samples with known numbers of cells, then apply this to in vivo MRI.
MRI:
Agarose phantoms were constructed with a dilute, known number of 4.5 micron diameter MPIOs (Dynal). Each bead has 10 pg of iron, simulating a labeled
cell. We performed MRI of 29 agarose phantoms at 7T using a 3D FLASH sequence
with TR/TE=30/10ms, and 100 μm isotropic voxels. We further performed in vivo
MRI of 5 rat brains. 3 rats were injected intracardiac with
MPIO-labeled MSCs, delivering cells to the brain – 2 rats were naïve. MRI was
identical to in vitro.
Machine learning
based cell quantification:
Machine learning is category of artificial
intelligence that enables a computer or a machine to learn a specific task from
humans and then automatically perform that task without manual assistance. Recently, deep learning has
proved to be the most successful machine learning algorithm. We use this
algorithm to learn spot definitions and then automatically quantify them in
unseen MRI. We explain our approach in a step-wise manner:
1. Since our approach learns from humans, therefore as a first step a human expert
manually click on spots in MRI using our in-house developed software. These clicks will define
ground-truth on spots in MRI.
2. The brain
is segmented out of the MRI and then further over-segmented using superpixels[1] to finally create a set of patches (See Figure 1). Each patch may or may not contain a spot
cross-section. Location of each patch is recorded and maintained.
3. Next, during the training/learning phase, the convolutional neural network deep learning algorithm evaluates patches that contain an expert’s ground-truth (spots) to the
ones with no ground truth (non-spot patches) and learns a model containing spot definitions.
4. During the testing phase, a set of patches are
extracted from a different unseen MRI and the learned model automatically
detect spot patches in it.
5. Neighboring spot patches in
consecutive slices are combined to form 3D spots.
Evaluation and Results
Figure 2 shows the number of particles quantified in the 6 identical in vitro samples from data acquired with various imaging parameters. Theoretically, there should be 2400 spots detected based on phantom construction. The number of detected spots ranges from ~2000 to ~3000 with increasing number detected as the TE increases from 10 to 30. Comparing row D with A, and E with B, we see that our approach shows robustness to noise in MRI.
We used the area under the curve (AUC) as a standard measure to evaluate the performance of the trained model, taking the manual spot definitions as ground truth. Using a set of 4 in vitro scans, our approach achieved cell detection accuracy of 99.8%. We show the ROCs for in vitro tests in Figure 3.
In vivo MRI of rats injected with labeled MSCs (n=3) had dark spots distributed throughout the brain whereas control animal scans (n=2) did not show spots. Single cell distribution in the brain was verified by histology. This set of in vivo MRI scans was evaluated using the standard AUC measure, achieving 94.6% accuracy. Cell numbers quantified from the 3 in vivo brain data with injected cells, ranged from 1417 to 3900. Figures 4 and 5 show the automatically detected spots in an in vivo and in vitro slice of MRI respectively.These results are significantly superior to what state-of-the-art achieved on the same data[2].
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the efforts of Margaret Bennewitz, University of Pittsburgh, who performed the cell transplants and acquired the original in vivo MRI data sets. Supported by NIH R01 DK107697.References
[1] Liu, Ming-Yu, et al. "Entropy rate superpixel segmentation." Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2011 IEEE Conference on. IEEE, 2011.
[2] M. J. Afridi, X. Liu, E. Shapiro, and A. Ross. Automatic in vivo cell detection in MRI. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI 2015), pages 391–399. Springer, 2015.