Dale H. Mugler1
1Neuroscience, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States
Synopsis
Keywords: Software Tools, Spectroscopy, Data Analysis, Metabolism
Brain tumor metabolic maps are one application
of non-invasive MR Spectroscopy (MRS), although there are many other areas of
patient treatment and surgery planning that would benefit from improved MRS
analysis. A fast, accurate new method for MRS is used here
to estimate the ratio of Choline to NAA from simulated spectra modeled on those
near a brain tumor, using simple formulas for determining the FID amplitudes
that relate to metabolite intensities and concentrations. No approximate numerical integration is
required. The time of computation of 0.052 seconds per voxel speeds the
construction of a metabolic 3D brain map.
Introduction
High accuracy of metabolite ratios or concentrations is important in
many applications of MRS, such as for constructing a 3D map of a brain tumor
for surgical intervention1,2. Requiring
analysis of many voxels for resolution, the speed of computation is also critical. Our new method for
post-processing MRS data called mdMRS 3 has a number of advantages that apply:
(i) removal of baseline offset and phase correction are simple, quick, and effective,
(ii) no large basis set of metabolites is required, and (iii) accuracy of FID
amplitude, which is proportional to area under the phase-corrected peak profile, is increased with a novel iteration similar to spectral editing, but used here during
post-processing. No numerical integration required. Results of an application of this new method for
metabolite ratios are shown for simulated but realistic data, with emphasis on
the Choline/NAA ratio. Methods
The FID data from the MR scanner is assumed to be a sum of terms of the form $$$\text{FID}(t) = A
e^{-t/T_2^*}e^{i\phi}e^{2\pi i\nu t},$$$ where $$$A, T_2^*, \phi, \nu$$$ are the
amplitude, damping constant, phase angle and frequency location. $$$\ \ $$$ Importantly, A is proportional to ``spectral peak area''4. The
FID has continuous Fourier transform (cFT) that is found by applying the integral formula
for the cFT with the assumption that the FID(t) is zero for $$$t<0.$$$ The cFT transform is given by $$cFT_\mathrm{{FID}} (w) = \frac{A e^{i \phi}}{1/T_2^* +2\pi i (w-\nu)} = \frac{b-a d}{w+d}, $$
where
constants $$$a = 0, b = A e^{i \phi}/(2\pi i), $$$ and
$$$d= 1/(2\pi i T_2^*) - \nu$$$ are included in this form partly to emphasize that
the only variable for the cFT transform of the FID is the frequency
variable $$$w.$$$ It is not difficult
to use the above equation to show that the transform, $$$cFT_{\mathrm{FID}}(w)$$$ is the equation of a circle in the complex plane. This feature was known and used in novel software
called CFIT5. Based on the
form of the transform as a circle, the mdMRS method extends that work to a new 3D-based method
for analyzing MRS data, with the prefix md emphasizing the goal of making the
results useful to medical doctors..
It is natural to do MRS
analysis in 3D, since the FID transform is inherently three-dimensional. The DFT of an FID is 2D, (real(DFT), imag(DFT), and frequency is
the third dimension. See Figure 1.
Only three valid points on a peak profile are needed to construct that profile
completely, since three points determine a circle.
Further this is also true for the cFT of the FID. The rightmost term in the displayed formula
above is a Linear Fractional Transform(LFT), that is a well-studied form which
has many known properties. The
connection to an LFT results in a simple formula for the amplitude A given
by $$$A = 2\pi |ad-b|$$$ which is proportional to the area used for MRS analysis. This mdMRS formula for A is both simple and
easy to compute, as well as being very accurate.
Simulated data based on patient data consisting of eight peak profiles
was analyzed with additive white gaussian noise at three different noise
levels. Denoising was applied to the noisy FID using wavelet denoising and then a Tukey filter. Figure 2 shows the noisy(red) and denoised(black) FID. See Figure 3 for the magnitude spectrum for
the two ratio cases considered: low and high Choline/NAA ratio. The new mdMRS methods, including the iterative refinement of amplitude estimates method that is similar to spectral editing but done in post-processing, was applied to obtain the best estimates of FID amplitudes. Results.
The amplitude estimates for both the low Choline/NAA ratio (0.449) and high ratio (2.457) show excellent results as listed in Table 1. The three noise levels considered go from lower (10dB), mid (0dB), to higher ($$$-$$$10 dB). For the low Choline/NAA ratio value and for the lower noise level, the average error was only 0.001, or about 0.3% relative error. Not listed is that this high accuracy is achieved for all lower noise levels as well. At the mid or higher noise levels, the accuracy decreases somewhat, but even at the highest noise level considered the average error had the low value of 2.9% relative error. For the high ratio value with Choline more than NAA (as for a brain tumor voxel), the relative amplitude errors were 0.2%, 0.7%, and 2.9% for the three different noise levels.
The new iterative mdMRS sharpening method, similar to spectral editing, provided nearly perfect convergence to the correct input amplitudes for FID with lower noise levels (SNR of 15dB or more), as shown in Table 2. Those results show that any ratio of two of the eight amplitude estimates will be nearly perfect in this case, and not just the Choline/NAA ratio The noisier FID input cases are not shown in Table 2, but again have small relative errors. .Conclusion.
The time of computation for analysis of one spectrum is about 0.052 seconds on a
PC with Intel i7 running at 2.8 GHz using MATLAB. This speed would reduce the analysis time of the large number of spectra needed for brain tumor localization in 3D.Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank William S. Clary, Ph.D., mathematician, most recently of the University of Akron, for technical conversations and ideas. Thanks also to D. Jenkins, M.D., neonatologist at MUSC for many helpful remarks and suggestions. In addition, thanks to Hunter W. Moss, Ph.D. for assistance with data handling.References
1. Weinberg
BD, Mullins M, Kuruva M., Shim H.
Clinical applications of magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in of
brain tumors: from diagnosis to treatment,
Radiol Clin North Am. 2021; 59(3): 349–362.
doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2021.01.004
2. Weinberg
BD and Shim H. How to measure molecules in brain tumors and
why/ Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 30: 2022
3.
Mugler
D and Clary WS. Methods, Systems, and Computer Readable Media
for Utilizing Spectral Circles for Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, Patent application
WO2022/051717 A 1, 2022
4. Near
J, Marjanska M, Harris AD, Juchem C, Kreis R, Wilson M, Öz G, Slotboom J, and Gasparovic C. Preprocessing,
analysis and quantification in single-voxel magnetic resonance spectroscopy:
experts' consensus recommendations. NMR Biomed 2021;34(5):e4257
5. Gabr
R, Ouwerkerk R, and Bottomley P. Quantifying in vivo MR spectra with circles. J
Magn Reson. 2006; 179(1):152–163