Evidence mapPaperPMID 40108439Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2025

Standardized pancreatic MRI-T1 measurement methods: comparison between manual measurement and a semi-automated pipeline with automatic quality control.

Alexandre Triay Bagur, Zobair Arya, Tom Waddell, Michele Pansini, Carolina Fernandes, Daniel Counter, Edward Jackson, Helena B Thomaides-Brears, Matthew D Robson, Daniel P Bulte and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Alexandre Triay BagurPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5836-737X
Zobair AryaPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4482-9115
Tom WaddellPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9101-7905
Michele PansiniClinica Di Radiologia EOC, Istituto Di Imaging Della Svizzera Italiana (IIMSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano 6900, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5610-3266
Carolina FernandesPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.
Daniel CounterPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.
Edward JacksonPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.
Helena B Thomaides-BrearsPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0774-6983
Matthew D RobsonPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.
Daniel P BulteDepartment of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PJ, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3034-8986
Rajarshi BanerjeePerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2022-5218
Paul AljabarPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6173-9007
Michael BradyPerspectum Ltd, Oxford OX4 2LL, United Kingdom.

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 719445National Consortium of Intelligent Medical ImagingWellcome Trust 104688
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesScanner-referenced T1 (srT1) is a method for measuring pancreas T1 relaxation time. The purpose of this multi-centre study is 2-fold: (1) to evaluate the repeatability of manual ROI-based analysis of srT1, (2) to validate a semi-automated measurement method with an automatic quality control (QC) module to identify likely discrepancies between automated and manual measurements.

methodsPancreatic MRI scans from a scan-rescan cohort (46 subjects) were used to evaluate the repeatability of manual analysis. Seven hundred and eight scans from a longitudinal multi-centre study of 466 subjects were divided into training, internal validation (IV), and external validation (EV) cohorts. A semi-automated method for measuring srT1 using machine learning is proposed and compared against manual analysis on the validation cohorts with and without automated QC.

resultsInter-operator agreement between manual ROI-based method and semi-automated method had low bias (3.8 ms or 0.5%) and limits of agreement [-36.6, 44.1] ms. There was good agreement between the 2 methods without automated QC (IV: 3.2 [-47.1, 53.5] ms, EV: -0.5 [-35.2, 34.2] ms). After QC, agreement on the IV set improved, was unchanged in the EV set, and the agreement in both was within inter-operator bounds (IV: -0.04 [-33.4, 33.3] ms, EV: -1.9 [-37.6, 33.7] ms). The semi-automated method improved scan-rescan agreement versus manual analysis (manual: 8.2 [-49.7, 66] ms, automated: 6.7 [-46.7, 60.1] ms).

conclusionsThe semi-automated method for characterization of standardized pancreatic T1 using MRI has the potential to decrease analysis time while maintaining accuracy and improving scan-rescan agreement. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We provide intra-operator, inter-operator, and scan-rescan agreement values for manual measurement of srT1, a standardized biomarker for measuring pancreas fibro-inflammation. Applying a semi-automated measurement method improves scan-rescan agreement and agrees well with manual measurements, while reducing human effort. Adding automated QC can improve agreement between manual and automated measurements. SUMMARY STATEMENT: We describe a method for semi-automated, standardized measurement of pancreatic T1 (srT1), which includes automated quality control. Measurements show good agreement with manual ROI-based analysis, with comparable consistency to inter-operator performance.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPancreasAdultAgedFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedQuality ControlReproducibility of Resultsfibro-inflammationpancreasquality controlstandardisedT1 mapping

Identifiers

PMID40108439
PMCPMC12089764

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.