bioRxivNeurosciencePreprint
A Comparison and Validation of BIDS Apps for Preprocessing of UCB-J PET data
Guusje HaveriD, Granville J Matheson, Hampus Yngwe, Max Andersson, Niklas K Edvall, Martin Noergaard, Francesca Zanderigo, Mike Schmidt, Elizabeth A Bartlett, Jeffrey M Miller, Zsolt Cselenyi, Mikael Tiger, Maria Beckman, Carl-Johan Ekman, Johan Lundberg
Abstract
Background Preprocessing of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) data can be performed in many different ways and often involves manual steps, resulting in reduced comparability across analyses and pipelines. Apps working on PET data organized according to the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) seek to automate preprocessing, enabling the application of standardized pipelines that increase comparability and reproducibility. In this study, two of these apps were validated against in-house software. Methods Data were acquired in-house from 14 subjects who received placebo in a randomized controlled clinical trial and underwent two PET measurements using the radioligand [11C]UCB-J. Preprocessing was performed with two BIDS Apps, PETPrep and PICNIC, as well as an in-house software. Arterial blood data were processed using Bloodstream, and [11C]UCB-J total distribution volume (VT) values were calculated using a 1-tissue compartment model using kinfitr. Results VT values for all 9 regions of interest were highly consistent across tools with estimates of Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for consistency ranging between 0.94 and >0.99, although bias between tools measured as signed Percentage Difference was present, ranging from 0.1% - 10.2% depending on the region. Tools performed similarly on test-retest metrics. We observed a negative test-retest bias in [11C]UCB-J VT of unknown origin. Conclusion BIDS Apps produce reliable and consistent results when compared both with each other and with an in-house software optimized for processing and analysis of our in-house data. Region-dependant bias between tools warrants caution for direct comparison of VT between tools. The usage of these apps could enable better comparability across publications
- organism: human
- assay: imaging
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: deep learning
- approach: statistical model
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- PET-BIDS, an extension to the brain imaging data structure for positron emission tomography
Martin Nørgaard, Granville James Matheson, … Melanie Ganz·Scientific DataPeer-reviewed·Mar 2, 2022
- BrainPET Studio: An Atlas-Based, User-Friendly Desktop Tool for Quantitative PET Neuroimaging Analysis
Fardin Nabizadeh·Neurology LettersPeer-reviewed·Feb 1, 2026
- Automated Long Axial Field of View PET Image Processing and Kinetic Modelling with the TurBO Toolbox
Jouni Tuisku, Santeri Palonen, … Lauri Nummenmaa·European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular ImagingPeer-reviewed·Jan 31, 2026
- Open-access template and database approaches for pseudo-CT generation in brain PET/MRI attenuation correction
Christian Milz, Matej Murgaš, … Murray Bruce Reed·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Sep 11, 2026
- Multivariate Analysis of PET Pharmacokinetic Parameters
Granville James Matheson, Robert Todd Ogden·EJNMMI PhysicsPeer-reviewed·Mar 13, 2023
- Magia: Robust automated image processing and kinetic modeling toolbox for PET neuroinformatics
Tomi Karjalainen, Jouni Tuisku, … Lauri Nummenmaa·Frontiers in NeuroinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Feb 4, 2020