The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) Public Access

Space shortcuts

Child pages
  • Publications

Versions Compared

Old Version 99

changes.mady.by.user Tracy Nolan

Saved on

compared with

New Version 100

changes.mady.by.user Tracy Nolan

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Publications relating to specific data collections:

Collection:    CT Colonography

  1. Yahya-Zoubir B, Hamami L. et al. Automatic 3D Mesh-Based Centerline Extraction from a Tubular Geometry Form. Information Technology and Control, 2016. 45(2):156-163. (link)
  2. Alazmani A, Hood A, et al. Quantitative Assessment of Colorectal Morphology: Implications for Robotic Colonoscopy. Medical Engineering and Physics, 2016. 38(2):148-154. (link)
  3. Gayathri Devi K, Radhakrishnan R. Automatic Segmentation of Colon in 3D CT Images and Removal of Opacified Fluid Using Cascade Feed Forward Neural Network. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine. 2015;2015.
  4. Namías R, et al., Automatic rectum limit detection by anatomical markers correlation. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics, 2014. 38(4):245-250.(link)
  5. Boone DJ, Halligan S, Roth HR, et al., CT Colonography: External Clinical Validation of an Algorithm for Computer-assisted Prone and Supine Registration. Radiology, 2013. 268(3):752-760.(link)
  6. Roth HR, et al., External clinical validation of prone and supine CT colonography registration in Abdominal Imaging. Computational and Clinical Applications 2012, Springer. 7601:10-19.(link)

Collection:    LIDC-IDRI

  1. Firmino M, Angelo G, et al. Computer-aided Detection (CADe) and Diagnosis (CADx) System for Lung Cancer with Likelihood of Malignancy Biomed Eng Online (2016) 15(1):2 (link)
  2. Deep G, Kaur L, et al. Directional Local Ternary Quantized Extrema Pattern: A new descriptor for Biomedical Image Indexing and Retrieval Eng Sci and Tech, an International Journal (2016) (link)
  3. Wang W, Luo J, Yang X, Lin H. Data Analysis of the Lung Imaging Database Consortium and Image Database Resource Initiative. Academic Radiology. 2015.

  4. Sivakumar, S. and C. Chandrasekar (2015). "A Novel Noise Removal Method for Lung CT SCAN Images Using Statistical Filtering Techniques." International Journal of Algorithms Design and Analysis 1(1).

  5. Shen S, Bui AA, Cong J, Hsu W. An automated lung segmentation approach using bidirectional chain codes to improve nodule detection accuracy. Computers in biology and medicine. 2015;57:139-49.
  6. Messay T, Hardie RC, Tuinstra TR. Segmentation of Pulmonary Nodules in Computed Tomography Using a Regression Neural Network Approach and its Application to the Lung Image Database Consortium and Image Database Resource Initiative Dataset. Medical Image Analysis. 2015.(paper)

  7. Magdy, E., N. Zayed, et al. Automatic Classification of Normal and Cancer Lung CT Images using Multi-scale AM-FM Features. Intl Journal of Biomedical Imaging, 2015. (link)

  8. Lassen BC, Jacobs C, et al. Robust Semi-automatic Segmentation of Pulmonary Subsolid Nodules in Chest Computed Tomography Scans. Phys Med Biol (2015) 60(3):1307-1323. (link)

  9. Kumar, D., M. J. Shafiee, et al. Discovery Radiomics for Computed Tomography Cancer Detection. arXiv e-print, 2015. (arXiv link)

  10. Demir, Ö. and A. Yılmaz Çamurcu (2015). "Computer-aided detection of lung nodules using outer surface features." Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering 26(s1): 1213-1222.

  11. Kumar, A., F. Nette, et al. (2014). "A Visual Analytics Approach using the Exploration of Multi-Dimensional Feature Spaces for Content-based Medical Image Retrieval  IEEE J Biomed Health Inform (2014) 19(5):1734:1746 (pubmed link)

  12. Sivakumar S and Chandrasekar C, Lung nodule detection using fuzzy clustering and support vector machines. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 2013. 5(1):179-185.(link)
  13. Gavrielides MA, Zeng R, Myers KJ, Sahiner B, Petrick N. Benefit of overlapping reconstruction for improving the quantitative assessment of CT lung nodule volume. Academic Radiology, 2013. 20(2):173-180. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.08.014. (link)
  14. Aggarwal P, Vig R, and Sardana H Patient-Wise Versus Nodule-Wise Classification of Annotated Pulmonary Nodules using Pathologically Confirmed Cases. Journal of Computers, 2013. 8(9):2245-2255. (link)
  15. Sivakumar S and Chandrasekar C, Lungs image segmentation through weighted FCM.Recent Advances in Computing and Software Systems (RACSS), 2012 International Conference. 25-27 April 2012 pages 109-113. IEEE. doi:10.1109/RACSS.2012.6212707 (link)
  16. Armato S, et al., Collaborative projects. Int J CARS, 2012. 7(1):S111-S115.
  17. Diciotti S, Lombardo S, Falchini M, Picozzi G, Mascalchi M. Automated segmentation refinement of small lung nodules in CT scans by local shape analysis. Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions. 2011. 58(12):3418-3428. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2011.2167621. (link)

  18. Raicu DS, Varutbangkul E, Furst JD, Armato SG III: Modeling semantics from image data: Opportunities from LIDC. International Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology 3: 83–113, 2010.

  19. Zinovev D, Duo Y, Raicu DS, Furst JD, Armato SG III: Consensus versus disagreement in imaging research: A case study using the LIDC Database. Journal of Digital Imaging 25: 423–436, 2012.

...

Info
iconfalse
titleThe following source material predate TCIA but refer to the LIDC Collection data
  1. Armato III SG, McLennan G, Bidaut L, McNitt-Gray MF, Meyer CR, Reeves AP, Zhao B, Aberle DR, Henschke CI, Hoffman EA, Kazerooni EA, MacMahon H, van Beek EJR, Yankelevitz D, et al.:The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) and Image Database Resource Initiative (IDRI): A completed reference database of lung nodules on CT scans.Medical Physics, 38: 915–931, 2011. (link)
  2. Armato SG III, McLennan G, McNitt-Gray MF, Meyer CR, Yankelevitz D, Aberle DR, Henschke CI, Hoffman EA, Kazerooni EA, MacMahon H, Reeves AP, Croft BY, Clarke LP, The Lung Image Database Consortium Research Group: Lung Image Database Consortium: Developing a resource for the medical imaging research community. Radiology 232: 739–748, 2004.
  3. Meyer CR, Johnson TD, McLennan G, Aberle DR, Kazerooni EA, MacMahon H, Mullan BF, Yankelevitz DF, van Beek EJR, Armato SG III, McNitt-Gray MF, Reeves AP, Gur D, Henschke CI, Hoffman EA, Bland PH, Laderach G, Pais R, Qing D, Piker C, Guo J, Starkey A, Max D, Croft BY, Clarke LP: Evaluation of lung MDCT nodule annotation across radiologists and methods. Academic Radiology 13: 1254–1265, 2006.
  4. Armato SG III, McNitt-Gray MF, Reeves AP, Meyer CR, McLennan G, Aberle DR, Kazerooni EA, MacMahon H, van Beek EJR, Yankelevitz D, Hoffman EA, Henschke CI, Roberts RY, Brown MS, Engelmann RM, Pais RC, Piker CW, Qing D, Kocherginsky M, Croft BY, Clarke LP: The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): An evaluation of radiologist variability in the identification of lung nodules on CT scans. Academic Radiology 14: 1409–1421, 2007.
  5. Armato SG III, Roberts RY, McNitt-Gray MF, Meyer CR, Reeves AP, McLennan G, Engelmann RM, Bland PH, Aberle DR, Kazerooni EA, MacMahon H, van Beek EJR, Yankelevitz D, Croft BY, Clarke LP: The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): Ensuring the integrity of expert-defined “truth.” Academic Radiology 14: 1455–1463, 2007.
  6. McNitt-Gray MF, Armato SG III, Meyer CR, Reeves AP, McLennan G, Pais R, Freymann J, Brown MS, Engelmann RM, Bland PH, Laderach GE, Piker C, Guo J, Towfic Z, Qing DP, Yankelevitz DF, Aberle DR, van Beek EJR, MacMahon H, Kazerooni EA, Croft BY, Clarke LP: The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) data collection process for nodule detection and annotation. Academic Radiology 14: 1464–1474, 2007.
  7. Reeves AP, Biancardi AM, Apanasovich TV, Meyer CR, MacMahon H, van Beek EJR, Kazerooni EA, Yankelevitz DF, McNitt-Gray MF, McLennan G, Armato SG III, Henschke CI, Aberle DR, Croft BY, Clarke LP: The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): A comparison of different size metrics for pulmonary nodule measurements. Academic Radiology 14: 1475–1485, 2007.
  8. Armato SG III, Roberts RY, Kocherginsky M, Aberle DR, Kazerooni EA, MacMahon H, van Beek EJR, Yankelevitz DF, McLennan G, McNitt-Gray MF, Meyer CR, Reeves AP, Caligiuri P, Quint LE, Sundaram B, Croft BY, Clarke LP: Assessment of radiologist performance in the detection of lung nodules: Dependence on the definition of “truth”. Academic Radiology 16: 28–38, 2009.

Collection: Mouse-Mammary

 

 

Info
titleThe following source material pre-date TCIA but refer to the Mouse-Mammary Collection data
  1. Jansen SA et al, NMR Biomed. 2011 Aug;24(7):880-7. 
  2. Jansen SA et al, Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11(5):R65. 
  3. Jansen SA et al, Radiology. 2009 Nov;253(2):399-406.
  4. Jansen SA et al, Phys Med Biol. 2008 Oct 7;53(19):5481-93.
  5. Jansen SA., Ductile carcinoma in situ: magnetic resonance and ultrasound imaging in mouse models of breast cancer (Mouse.Mammary.MRI.Ultrasound.Summary.pdf).
  6. Jansen S., Investigating genetic events in the progression of ductal carcinoma in situ (Mouse.Mammary.Genetics.DCIS.pdf).

 

 

 

Collection: NLST

Please see List of NLST Publications at NIH to browse publications from this Data Collection.

Collection:    Phantom FDA

  1. Peskin AP, Dima AA, Saiprasad G. An Automated Method for Locating Phantom modules in Anthropomorphic Thoracic Phantom CT Studies. The 2012 International Conference on Image Processing, Computer Vision, and Pattern Recognition. 2012.(link)
  2. Gavrielides MA, Kinnard LM, Myers KJ ,Peregoy J, Pritchard WF, Zeng R, Esparza J, Karanian J, Petrick N, A resource for the assessment of lung nodule size estimation methods: database of thoracic CT scans of an anthropomorphic phantom, Optics Express , vol. 18, n.14, pp. 15244-15255, 2010. (link)

Collection:    Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN)

  1. Kalpathy-Cramer J, Freymann JB, Kirby JS, et al. Quantitative Imaging Network: Data Sharing and Competitive Algorithm Validation Leveraging The Cancer Imaging Archive Translational Oncology. 2014 Feb;7(1):147-52. doi: 10.1593/tlo.13862. (link)
  2. Huang W, Li X, Chen Y, Li X, Chang MC, Oborski MJ, Malyarenko DI, Muzi M, Jajamovich GH, Fedorov A, Tudorica A, Gupta SN, Laymon CM, Marro KI, Dyvorne HA, Miller JV, Barbodiak DP, Chenevert TL, Yankeelov TE, Mountz JM, Kinahan PE, Kikinis R, Taouli B, Fennessy F, Kalpahthy-Cramer J. Variations of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of breast cancer therapy response: a multicenter data analysis challenge. Translational Oncology. 2014 Feb;7(1):153-66. (link)
  3. Clarke LP, Nordstrom RJ, Zhang H, Tandon P, et al. The Quantitative Imaging Network: NCI’s Historical Perspective and Planned Goals Translational Oncology. 2014 Feb;7(1):1-4. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1593/tlo.13832. (link)
  4. Levy MA, Freymann JB, Kirby JS, Fedorov A, Fennessy FM, Eschrich SA, Berglund AE, Fenstermacher DA, Tan Y, Guo X, Casavant TL, Brown BJ, Braun TA, Dekker A, Roelofs E, Mountz JM, Boada F, Laymon C, Oborski M, Rubin DL. Informatics methods to enable sharing of quantitative imaging research data. Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2012 Nov;30(9):1249-56. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2012.04.007. Epub 2012 Jul 6. (link)

Collection:    QIN Breast

  1. Li X, Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, Kang H, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson VG, Farley J, Mayer IA, Kelley MC, Meszoely IM, Means-Powell J, Grau AM, Sanders M, Yankeelov TE. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for predicting pathological response after the first cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Investigative Radiology, 2015 Apr;50(4):195-204. PMCID: PMC4471951 doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000100.

  2. Weis JA, Miga MI, Arlinghaus LR, Li X, Abramson V, Chakravarthy AB, Pendyala P, Yankeelov TE. Predicting the Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Therapy Using a Mechanically Coupled Reaction-Diffusion Model. Cancer Res. 2015 Nov 15;75(22):4697-707. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-2945.

  3. Atuegwu NC, Arlinghaus L, Li X, Welch EB, Chakravarthy AB, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Integration of diffusion weighted MRI data and a simple mathematical model to predict breast tumor cellularity during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2011; 66:1689-96. PMCID: PMC3218213
  4. Li, X, Welch EB, Chakravarthy B, Mayer I, Meszeoly I, Kelley M, Means-Powell J, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Statistical comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI pharmacokinetic models in human breast cancer. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2012; 68:261-71. PMCID: PMC3291742
  5. Smith DS, Gambrell JV, Li X, Arlinghaus LA, Quarles CC, Yankeelov TE, Welch EB. Robustness of Quantitative Compressive Sensing MRI: The Effect of Random Acquisitions on Derived Parameters for DCE and DSC-MRI. IEEE Transactions in Medical Imaging, 2012; 31:504-11. PMCID: PMC3289060
  6. Smith DS, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE, Welch EB. Real-time Compressive Sensing MRI Reconstruction using GPU Computing and Split Bregman Methods. International Journal of Biomedical Imaging, 2012; 2012:864827. PMCID: PMC3296267
  7. Dula AN, Arlinghaus LR, Dortch RD, Dewey BE, Whisenant JE, Ayers GD, Yankeelov TE, Smith SE. Amide Proton Transfer Imaging of the Breast at 3 T: Establishing reproducibility and possible feasibility for assessing chemotherapy response. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2013; 70: 216-24. PMCID: PMC3505231
  8. Yankeelov TE, Peterson TE, Abramson RG, Garcia-Izquierdo D, Arlinghaus LR, Li X, Atuegwu NC, Catana C, Manning HC, Fayad ZA, Gore JC. Simultaneous PET-MRI in Oncology: A Solution Looking for a Problem? Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2012; 30:1342-56. Selected as a Top 25 paper in Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2012. PMCID: PMC3466373
  9. Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, Weis JA, Li X, Dula AN, Chekmenev EY, Smith SA, Miga MI, Abramson VG, Yankeelov TE. Current and emerging quantitative magnetic resonance imaging methods for assessing and predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy. Breast Cancer: Targets and Therapies, 2012; 4: 139-154. PMCID: PMC3496377
  10. Li X, Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson V, Mayer I, Farley J, Delbeke D, Yankeelov TE. An Algorithm for Longitudinal Registration of PET/CT Images Acquired During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: Preliminary Results. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Research, 2012; 16:62. PMCID: PMC3520720
  11. Fluckiger U, Loveless ME, Barnes SL, Lepage M, Yankeelov TE. A diffusion-compensated model for the analysis of DCE-MRI data: theory, simulations, and experimental results. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2013; 58:1983-98. PMCID: PMC3646091
  12. Yankeelov TE. Integrating Imaging Data into Predictive Biomathematical and Biophysical Models of Cancer. ISRN Biomathematics, 2012; Article ID 287394. PMCID: PMC3729405
  13. Atuegwu NC, Arlinghaus LR, Li X, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson VG, Sanders ME, Yankeelov TE. Parameterizing the Logistic Model of Tumor Growth by DW-MRI and DCE-MRI Data to Predict Treatment Response and Changes in Breast Cancer Cellularity During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Translational Oncology, 2013; 6:253-64. PMCID: PMC3660793
  14. Klomp DWJ, Dula AN, Arlinghaus LR, Italiaander M, Dortch RD, Zu Z, Williams JM, Gochberg DF, Luijten PR, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE, Smith SA. Amide Proton Transfer Imaging of the Human Breast at 7 Tesla: Development and Reproducibility. NMR in Biomedicine, 2013; 26:1271-7. PMCID: PMC3726578
  15. Mani S, Chen Y, Li X, Arlinghaus L, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson V, Bhave SR, Levy MA, Xu H, Yankeelov TE. Machine Learning for Predicting the Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2013; 20:688-95. PMCID: PMC3721158
  16. Li X, Arlinghaus LR, Ayers GD, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson RG, Abramson VG, Atuegwu N, Farley J, Mayer IA, Kelley MC, Meszoely IM, Means-Powell J, Grau AM, Sanders M, Bhave SR, Yankeelov TE. DCE-MRI Analysis Methods for Predicting the Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Pilot Study Findings. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2014; 71(4):1592-602. PMCID: PMC3742614
  17. Yankeelov TE, Atuegwu N, Hormuth D, Weis JA, Barnes SL, Miga MI, Rericha EC, Quaranta V. Clinically relevant modeling of tumor growth and treatment response. Science Translational Medicine 2013; 5:187ps9. PMCID: PMC3938952
  18. Abramson RG, Hoyt TL, Wilson KJ, Li X, Arlinghaus LR, Su P-F, Abramson VG, Chakravarthy AB, Yankeelov TE. Early Assessment of Breast Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy by Semi- Quantitative Analysis of High Temporal Resolution DCE-MRI: Preliminary Results. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2013 ; 31:1457-64. PMCID: PMC3807825
  19. Weis JA, Miga MI, Arlinghaus LA, Li X, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson VG, Farley J, Yankeelov TE. A mechanically coupled reaction-diffusion model for predicting the response of breast tumors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Physics of Medicine and Biology, 2013; 58:5851-66. PMCID: PMC3791925
  20. Smith DA, Yankeelov TE, Welch EB. Potential of Compressed Sensing in Quantitative MR Imaging of Cancer. Cancer Imaging, 2013; 13:633-44. PMCID: PMC3893904
  21. Fluckiger JU, Li X, Whisenant JG, Peterson TE, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data to constrain a positron emission tomography kinetic model: theory and simulations. International Journal of Biomedical Imaging, 2013; 2013:576470. PMCID: PMC3814089
  22. Fedorov A, Fluckiger J, Ayers GD, Li X, Gupta SN, Mulkern R, Yankeelov TE, Fennessy FM. A Comparison of Two Methods for Estimating DCE-MRI Parameters via Individual and Cohort Based AIFs in Prostate Cancer: A Step Towards Practical Implementation. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2014; 32:321-9. PMCID: PMC3965600
  23. Li X, Kang H, Arlinghaus LR, Abramson RG, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson VG, Farley J, Sanders M, Yankeelov TE. Analyzing Spatial Heterogeneity in DCE- and DW-MRI Parametric Maps to Optimize Prediction of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer. Translational Oncology, 2014; 7:14-22. PMCID: PMC3998687
  24. Chenevert TL, Malyarenko DI, Newitt D, Hylton N, Huang W, Li X, Tudorica A, Fedorov A, Fennessy F, Kikinis R, Arlinghaus L, Li X, Yankeelov TE, Muzi M, Marro KI, Kinahan PE, Jajamovich GH, Dyvorne HA, Taouli B, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Oborski MJ, Laymon CM, Mountz JM, Ross BD. Error in Quantitative Image Analysis Due to Platform-Dependent Image Scaling. Translational Oncology, 2014; 7:65-71. PMCID: PMC3998685
  25. Huang W, Li X, Chen Y, Li X, Chang M-C, Oborski MJ, Malyarenko DI, Muzi M, Jajamovich GH, Federov A, Tudorica A, Gupta S, Laymon CM, Marro KI, Dyvorne HA, Miller JV, Chenevert TL, Yankeelov TE, Mountz JM, Kinahan PE, Kikinis R, Taouli B, Fennessy F, Kalpathy-Cramer J. Variations of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Breast Cancer Therapy Response: A Multicenter Data Analysis Challenge. Translational Oncology, 2014; 7:153-66. PMCID: PMC3998693
  26. Atuegwu NC, Li X, Arlinghaus LR, Abramson RG, Williams JM, Chakravarthy AB, Abramson V, Yankeelov TE. Longitudinal, Inter-modality Registration of Quantitative Breast PET and MRI Data Acquired Before and During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Preliminary Results. Medical Physics, 2014; 41:052302. PMCID: PMC4000383
Info
titleThe following source material predate TCIA but refer to the QIN-Breast Collection data
  1. Li X, Dawant BM, Welch EB, Chakravarthy AB, Freehardt D, Mayer I, Kelley M, Meszoely I, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Validation of an algorithm for the nonrigid registration of longitudinal breast MR images using realistic phantoms. Medical Physics, 2010; 37:2541-52. PMCID: PMC2881925
  2. Atuegwa NC, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Using Quantitative Imaging Data to Drive Mathematical Models of Tumor Growth and Treatment Response. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2010; 55:2429-49. PMCID: PMC2897238
  3. Yankeelov TE, Arlinghaus L, Li X, Gore JC. The role of magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers in clinical trials of treatment response in cancer. Seminars in Oncology, 2011; 38:16-25. PMCID: PMC3073543
  4. Arlinghaus L, Li X, Levy M, Smith D, Welch WB, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Current and Future Trends in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assessments of the Response of Breast Tumors to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Journal of Oncology, 2010. pii: 919620. Epub 2010 Sep 29. PMCID: PMC2952974
  5. Arlinghaus LR, Welch EB, Chakravarthy AB, Farley JS, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Motion and distortion correction in diffusion-weighted MRI of the breast at 3T. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2011; 33:1063-70. PMCID: PMC3081111
  6. Gore JC, Manning HC, Quarles CC, Waddell KW, Yankeelov TE. Magnetic Resonance in the Era of Molecular Imaging of Cancer. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2011; 29:587-600. PMCID: PMC3285504
  7. Arlinghaus LR, Li X, Rahman AR, Welch EB, Xu L, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. On the Relationship Between the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient and Extravascular Extracellular Volume Fraction in Human Breast Cancer. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2011; 29:630-8. PMCID: PMC3100356
  8. Smith DS, Welch EB, Li X, Arlinghaus LD, Loveless ME, Koyama T, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. Quantitative effects of accelerated dynamic contrast enhanced MRI data using compressed sensing. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2011; 56:4933-46. PMCID: PMC3192434
  9. Li, X, Welch EB, Chakravarthy B, Mayer I, Meszeoly I, Kelley M, Means-Powell J, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE. A novel AIF tracking method and comparison of DCE-MRI parameters using individual and population-based AIFs in human breast cancer. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2011; 56:5753-69. PMCID: PMC3176673

 

Collection: QIN GBM DCE-MRI

  1. Gerstner ER, Zhang Z, Fink JR, Muzi M, Hanna L, Greco E, Mintz A, Kostakoglu L, Eikman EA, Prah MA, Ellingson BM, Ratai EM, Schmainda KM, Sorensen G, Barboriak DP,  Mankoff DA. ACRIN 6684: Assessment of tumor hypoxia in newly diagnosed GBM using 18F-FMISO PET and MRI. Clin Cancer Res 2016. Accepted.
  2. Gerstner ER, Zhang Z, Fink JR, Muzi M, Hanna L, Greco E, Mintz A, Kostakoglu L, Eikman EA, Prah M, Schmainda KM, Sorensen GA, Barboriak D,  Mankoff DA. ACRIN 6684: Assessment of tumor hypoxia in newly diagnosed GBM using 18F-FMISO PET and MRI. J Clin Oncol 33(Suppl):2024. 2015.
  3. Fink JR, Zhang Z, Gerstner ER, Muzi M, Kostakoglu L, Mintz A, Eikman EA, Barboriak D,  Mankoff DA. ACRIN 6684: Multicenter phase II assessment of tumor hypoxia in glioblastoma using 18F-Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) PET and MRI. J Nucl Med 56(Suppl3):325. 2015.
  4. Fink JR, Muzi M, Peck M,  Krohn KA. Multimodality Brain Tumor Imaging: MR Imaging, PET, and PET/MR Imaging. J Nucl Med 56(10):1554-1561. 2015.
  5. Muzi M, Fink JR, Richards TL, Marro KI, Wong T, Muzi JP, Eary JF, Rockhill JK,  Krohn KA. Evaluation of PET and MR measurements to examine progression in glioma patients. J Nucl Med 55(Suppl1):1512-. 2014.


Collection:   QIN HeadNeck

 

  1. Fedorov A, Clunie D, Ulrich E, Bauer C, Wahle A, Brown B, Onken M, Riesmeier J, Pieper S, Kikinis R, Buatti J, Beichel RR. (2016) DICOM for quantitative imaging biomarker development: a standards based approach to sharing clinical data and structured PET/CT analysis results in head and neck cancer research. PeerJ 4:e2057 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2057 (link)
  2. Beichel RR., Van Tol M., Ulrich EJ., Bauer C., Chang T., Plichta KA., Smith BJ., Sunderland JJ., Graham MM., Sonka M., Buatti JM. 2016. Semiautomatedsegmentation of head and neck cancers in 18F-FDG PET scans: Ajust-enough-interaction approach. Medical physics 43:2948–2964. DOI:
    10.1118/1.4948679.

Collection:    QIN Prostate

  1. Fedorov A, Fluckiger J, Ayers GD, Li X, Gupta SN, Tempany C, Mulkern R, Yankeelov TE, Fennessy FM. A comparison of two methods for estimating DCE-MRI parameters via individual and cohort based AIFs in prostate cancer: A step towards practical implementation. Magnetic resonance imaging. 2014;32(4):321-9.
  2. Hegde JV, Mulkern RV, Panych LP, Fennessy FM, Fedorov A, Maier SE, Tempany C. Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: An update on state‐of‐the‐art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2013;37(5):1035-54.
  3. Benalcázar, M. E., M. Brun, et al. (2015). Automatic Design of Window Operators for the Segmentation of the Prostate Gland in Magnetic Resonance Images. VI Latin American Congress on Biomedical Engineering CLAIB 2014, Paraná, Argentina 29, 30 & 31 October 2014, Springer.

  4. Li, A., C. Li, et al. (2013). Automated Segmentation of Prostate MR Images Using Prior Knowledge Enhanced Random Walker. Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA), 2013 International Conference on, IEEE.

  5. Qiu, W., J. Yuan, et al. (2014). Prostate segmentation: An efficient convex optimization approach with axial symmetry using 3-D TRUS and MR images. Medical Imaging, IEEE Transactions on 33(4): 947-960.

  6. Xie, Q. and D. Ruan (2014). Low-complexity atlas-based prostate segmentation by combining global, regional, and local metrics. Medical physics 41(4): 041909.

  7. Zhao, T. and D. Ruan (2015). Two-stage fusion set selection in multi-atlas-based image segmentation. Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), 2015 IEEE 12th International Symposium on, IEEE.

Collection:   QIN Sarcoma

  1. Meyer JM, Perlewitz KS, Hayden JB, Doung Y-C, Hung AY, Vetto JT, Pommier RF, Mansoor A, Beckett BR, Tudorica A. Phase I trial of preoperative chemoradiation plus sorafenib for high-risk extremity soft tissue sarcomas with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI correlates. Clinical Cancer Research. 2013;19(24):6902-11.

Collection:    RIDER Collections

  1. Aerts, H. J. W. L. et al. Defining a Radiomic Response Phenotype: A Pilot Study using targeted therapy in NSCLC. Sci. Rep.(2016) 6, 33860 (link)

  2. Oliveira B, O'Halloran M, Conceicao R, Glavin M, Jones E. Development of Clinically-Informed 3D Tumor Models for Microwave Imaging Applications. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters 2016;15:520-3. doi: 10.1109/LAWP.2015.2456051

  3. Melouah A. Comparison of Automatic Seed Generation Methods for Breast Tumor Detection Using Region Growing Technique.  Computer Science and Its Applications: Springer; 2015. p. 119-28.
  4. Aerts HJ, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RTH, Parmar C, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nature Communications, 2014. 5(4006). doi:10.1038/ncomms5006(link)
  5. Balagurunathan Y, Kumar V, Gu Y, Kim J, Wang H, Liu Y, Goldgof DB, Hall LO, Korn R, Zhao B. Test–Retest Reproducibility Analysis of Lung CT Image Features. Journal of digital imaging. 2014:1-19.

  6. Melouah, A. (2015). Comparison of Automatic Seed Generation Methods for Breast Tumor Detection Using Region Growing Technique. Computer Science and Its Applications, Springer: 119-128.

  7. Desseroit M-C, Visvikis D, Tixier F, Majdoub M, Perdrisot R, Guillevin R, Le Rest CC, Hatt M. Development of a nomogram combining clinical staging with 18F-FDG PET/CT image features in non-small-cell lung cancer stage I–III. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2016:1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3325-5

...

Info
titleThe following source material predate TCIA but refer to the data in this Collection
  1. Meyer CR, Armato SG III, Fenimore CP, McLennan G, Bidaut LM, Barboriak DP, Gavrielides MA, Jackson EF, McNitt-Gray MF, Kinahan PE, Petrick N, Zhao B. Quantitative imaging to assess tumor response to therapy: Common themes of measurement, truth data and error sources. Translational Oncology 2: 198–210, 2009. (link)
  2. McNitt-Gray MF, Bidaut LM, Armato SG III, Meyer CR, Gavrielides MA, Fenimore CP, McLennan G, Petrick N, Zhao B, Reeves AP, Beichel R, Kim H-J, Kinnard L. CT assessment of response to therapy: Tumor volume change measurement, truth data and error.Translational Oncology2009. 2:216–222. (link)
  3. Kinahan PE, Doot RK, Wanner-Roybal M, Bidaut LM, Armato SG III, Meyer CR, McLennan G.PET/CT assessment of response to therapy: Tumor change measurement, truth data and error.Translational Oncology 2:223–230, 2009. (link)
  4. Jackson EF, Barboriak DP, Bidaut LM, Meyer CR. Magnetic resonance assessment of response to therapy: tumor change measurement, truth data and error sources.Translational Oncology 2009 Dec;2(4):211-5. PubMed PMID: 19956380; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2781079. (link)
  5. Armato SG 3rd, Meyer CR, Mcnitt-Gray MF, McLennan G, Reeves AP, Croft BY, Clarke LP;RIDER Research Group. The Reference Image Database to Evaluate Response to therapy in lung cancer (RIDER) project: a resource for the development of change-analysis software.Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Oct;84(4):448-56. PubMed PMID: 18754000. (link)

 

Collection:    TCGA-BRCA

  1. Mazurowski MA, Zhang J, Grimm LJ, Yoon SC, Silber JI. Radiogenomic Analysis of Breast Cancer: Luminal B Molecular Subtype Is Associated with Enhancement Dynamics at MR Imaging. Radiology, 2014. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132641 (link)

  2. Lavasani, S. N., A. F. Kazerooni, et al. (2015). Discrimination of Benign and Malignant Suspicious BreastTumors Based on Semi-Quantitative DCE-MRI ParametersEmploying Support Vector Machine. Frontiers in Biomedical Technologies 2(2): 397-403.

  3. Anand, S., V. Vinod, et al. Application of Fuzzy c-means and Neural networks to categorize tumor affected breast MR Images. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 10(64): 2015.

  4. Guo, W., H. Li, et al. (2015). Prediction of clinical phenotypes in invasive breast carcinomas from the integration of radiomics and genomics data. Journal of Medical Imaging 2(4): 041007-041007.

Collection:    TCGA-GBM

  1. Mulvey M, Muhyadeen S,  Sinha U. Classification of Glioblastoma Multiforme Molecular Subtypes Using Three-Dimensional Multi-Modal MR Imaging Features. Med. Phys. 43, 3373 (2016); (link)
  2. Ren X, Cui Y, Gao H,  Li, R. Identifying High-Risk Tumor Volume Based On Multi-Region and Integrated Analysis of Multi-Parametric MR Images for Prognostication of Glioblastoma. Med. Phys. 43, 3751 (2016); (link)
  3. Dunn WD Jr,  Aerts HJWL, et al.  Assessing the Effects of Software Platforms on Volumetric Segmentation of Glioblastoma.   J   Neuroimaging Psychiatry Neurol 2016. 1(2): 64-72.
  4. Upadhaya T, Morvan Y, et al. Prognosis classification in glioblastoma multiforme using multimodal MRI derived heterogeneity textural features: impact of pre-processing choices. Proc. SPIE 9785, Medical Imaging 2016: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 97850W (March 24, 2016); (link)

  5. Upadhaya T, Morvan Y, et al. Prognostic value of multimodal MRI tumor features in Glioblastoma multiforme using textural features analysis. In Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), 2015 IEEE 12th International Symposium on, pp. 50-54. IEEE, 2015.

  6. Upadhaya T, Morvan Y, et al. A framework for multimodal imaging-based prognostic model building: Preliminary study on multimodal MRI in Glioblastoma Multiforme. IRBM. 2015 Nov 30;36(6):345-50.

  7. Reza SM, Mays R, Iftekharuddin KM, editors. Multi-fractal detrended texture feature for brain tumor classification. SPIE Medical Imaging; 2015: International Society for Optics and Photonics.

  8. Nabizadeh N, Kubat M. Brain tumors detection and segmentation in MR images: Gabor wavelet vs. statistical features. Computers & Electrical Engineering. 2015.

  9. Natteshan N, Jothi JAA. Automatic Classification of Brain MRI Images Using SVM and Neural Network Classifiers.  Advances in Intelligent Informatics: Springer; 2015. p. 19-30. (link)

  10. Zhang J, Barboriak DP, Hobbs H, Mazurowski MA. A fully automatic extraction of magnetic resonance image features in Glioblastoma patients. Medical physics. 2014;41(4):042301.

  11. Wangaryattawanich P, Wang J, Thomas GA, Chaddad A, Zinn PO, Colen RR, editors. Survival analysis of pre-operative GBM patients by using quantitative image features. Control, Decision and Information Technologies (CoDIT), 2014 International Conference on; 2014: IEEE.

  12. Colen RR, Wang J, Singh SK, Gutman DA, Zinn PO. Glioblastoma: Imaging Genomic Mapping Reveals Sex-specific Oncogenic Associations of Cell Death. Radiology. 2014.

  13. Colen RR, Vangel M, Wang J, Gutman DA, Hwang SN, Wintermark M, Rajan J, Jilwan-Nicola M, Chen JY, Raghavan P, Holder CA, Rubin D, Huang E, Kirby J, Freymann J, Jaffee CC, Flanders A, Zinn PO. Imaging genomic mapping of an invasive MRI phenotype predicts patient outcome and metabolic dysfunction: a TCGA glioma phenotype research group project.BMC Medical Genomics, 2014. 7(1):30. doi:10.1186/1755-8794-7-30 (link)
  14. Gevaert O, Mitchell LA, Achrol AS, Xu J, Echegaray S, Steinberg GK, Chesier SH, Napel S, Zaharchuk G, Plevritis SK. Glioblastoma Multiforme: Exploratory Radiogenomic Analysis by Using Quantitative Image Features. Radiology, 2014. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14131731 (link)
  15. Mazurowski MA, Zhang J, Peters KB, and Hobbs H. Computer-extracted MR imaging features are associated with survival in glioblastoma patients. Journal of Neuro-Oncology. 2014 Aug 24 [Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.1007/s11060-014-1580-5 (link)
  16. Jain R, Poisson L, Gutman D, Scarpace L, Hwang SN, Holder C, Wintermark M, Colen RR, Kirby J, Freymann J, Jaffe C, Mikkelsen T, Flanders A. Outcome Prediction in Patients with Glioblastoma by Using Imaging, Clinical, and Genomic Biomarkers: Focus on the Nonenhancing Component of the Tumor. Radiology. 2014 Aug;272(2):484-93. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14131691. Epub 2014 Mar 19. 2014 (link)
  17. Nicolasjilwan M, Hu Y, Yan C, Meerzaman D, Holder CA, Gutman D, et al. Addition of MR imaging features and genetic biomarkers strengthens glioblastoma survival prediction in TCGA patients. Journal of Neuroradiology, July 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.neurad.2014.02.006
  18. Wassal E, Zinn P, Colen R. DIFFUSION AND CONVENTIONAL MR IMAGING GENOMIC BIOMARKER SIGNATURE FOR EGFR MUTATION IDENTIFICATION IN GLIOBLASTOMA. Neuro-Oncology. 2014;16(suppl 5):v156-v7.

  19. Wassal E, Zinn P, Colen R. DIFFUSION AND CONVENTIONAL MR IMAGING GENOMIC BIOMARKER SIGNATURE PREDICTS IDH-1 MUTATION IN GLIOBLASTOMA PATIENTS. Neuro-Oncology. 2014;16(suppl 5):v157-v.

  20. Kwon D, Shinohara RT, Akbari H, Davatzikos C. Combining Generative Models for Multifocal Glioma Segmentation and Registration.  Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2014: Springer; 2014. p. 763-70.

  21. Amer A, Zinn P, Colen R. IMMEDIATE POST OPERATIVE VOLUME OF ABNORMAL FLAIR SIGNAL PREDICTS PATIENT SURVIVAL IN GLIOBLASTOMA PATIENTS. Neuro-Oncology. 2014;16(suppl 5):v138-v.
  22. Amer A, Zinn P, Colen R. IMMEDIATE POST-RESECTION PERICAVITARIAN DWI HYPERINTENSITY IN GLIOBLASTOMA PATIENTS IS PREDICTIVE OF PATIENT OUTCOME. Neuro-Oncology. 2014;16(suppl 5):v138-v9.
  23. Gutman DA, Cooper LAD, Hwang SN, Holder CA, Gao J, Aurora TD, Dunn WD, Scarpace L, Mikkelsen T, Jain R, Wintermark M, Jilwan M, Raghavan P, Huang E, Clifford RJ, Monqkolwat P, Kleper V, Freymann J, Kirby J, Zinn PO, Moreno CS, Jaffe C, Colen R, Rubin DL, Saltz J, Flanders A, Brat DJ. MR Imaging Predictors of Molecular Profile and Survival: Multi-institutional Study of the TCGA Glioblastoma Data Set. Radiology. 2013 May:267(2):560-569,doi:10.1148/radiol.13120118 (link)
  24. Jain R, Poisson L, Narang J, Gutman D, Scarpace L, Hwang SN, Holder C, Wintermark M, Colen RR, Kirby J, Freymann J, Brat DJ, Jaffe C, Mikkelsen T. Genomic Mapping and Survival Prediction in Glioblastoma: Molecular Subclassification Strengthened by Hemodynamic Imaging Biomarkers. Radiology, 2013 Apr:267(1):212 –220, doi:10.1148/radiol.12120846 (link)
  25. Mazurowski MA, Desjardins A, Malof JM. Imaging descriptors improve the predictive power of survival models for glioblastoma patients. Neuro-oncology, 2013. 15(10):1389-1394 (link)
  26. Zinn PO, Colen RR. Imaging Genomic Mapping in Glioblastoma. Neurosurgery 60:126-130. Aug 2013 (link)
  27. Jain R, Poisson L, Narang J, Scarpace L, Rosenblum ML, Rempel S, Mikkelson T. Correlation of Perfusion Parameters with Genes Related to Angiogenesis Regulation in Glioblastoma: A Feasibility Study. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 2012. 33(7):1343-1348 [Epub ahead of print] (link)
  28. Zinn PO, Sathyan P, Mahajan B, Bruyere J, Hegi M, et al. A Novel Volume-Age-KPS (VAK) Glioblastoma Classification Identifies a Prognostic Cognate microRNA-Gene Signature. PLoS ONE, 2012 7(8): e41522. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041522 (link)
  29. Zinn PO, Majadan B, Sathyan P, Singh SK, Majumder S, et al. Radiogenomic Mapping of Edema/Cellular Invasion MRI-Phenotypes in Glioblastoma Multiforme. PLoS ONE, 2011 6(10): e25451. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025451 (link)

  30. Wangaryattawanich, P., M. Hatami, et al.  "Multicenter imaging outcomes study of The Cancer Genome Atlas glioblastoma patient cohort: imaging predictors of overall and progression-free survival." Neuro-oncology, (2015): nov117 .

  31. Kuo, J. S., K. B. Pointer, et al. (2015). "139 Human Ether-a-Go-Go-Related-1 Gene (hERG) K+ Channel as a Prognostic Marker and Therapeutic Target for Glioblastoma." Neurosurgery 62: 210-211.

  32. Zinn, P. O., M. Hatami, et al. (2015). "138 Diffusion MRI ADC Mapping of Glioblastoma Edema/Tumor Invasion and Associated Gene Signatures." Neurosurgery 62: 210.

  33. Steed, T., J. Treiber, et al. (2015). "Iterative Probabilistic Voxel Labeling: Automated Segmentation for Analysis of The Cancer Imaging Archive Glioblastoma Images." American Journal of Neuroradiology 36(4): 678-685.

  34. Lee, J., S. Narang, et al. (2015). "Associating spatial diversity features of radiologically defined tumor habitats with epidermal growth factor receptor driver status and 12-month survival in glioblastoma: methods and preliminary investigation." Journal of Medical Imaging 2(4): 041006-041006.

  35. Itakura, H., A. S. Achrol, et al. (2015). "Magnetic resonance image features identify glioblastoma phenotypic subtypes with distinct molecular pathway activities." Science Translational Medicine 7(303): 303ra138-303ra138.

  36. Cui, Y., K. K. Tha, et al. (2015). "Prognostic Imaging Biomarkers in Glioblastoma: Development and Independent Validation on the Basis of Multiregion and Quantitative Analysis of MR Images." Radiology: 150358.

  37. Lee, J., S. Narang, et al. (2015). "Spatial Habitat Features Derived from Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data Are Associated with Molecular Subtype and 12-Month Survival Status in Glioblastoma Multiforme." PloS one 10(9): e0136557.

  38. Rios Velazquez E, Meier R, Dunn WD Jr, Alexander B, Wiest R, Bauer S, Gutman DA, Reyes M, Aerts HJ. "Fully automatic GBM segmentation in the TCGA-GBM dataset: Prognosis and correlation with VASARI features." Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 18;5:16822. doi: 10.1038/srep16822.

Collection:

...

TCGA-KIRC 

  1. Chen X, Zhou Z, Thomas K, Wang J. Predicting Gene Mutations in Renal Cell Carcinoma Based On CT Imaging Features: Validation Using TCGA-TCIA Datasets. Med. Phys. 43, 3705 (2016); (link)
  2. Zhu H, Chen H, Lin Z, Shi G, Lin X, Wu Z, Zhang X. Identifying molecular genetic features and oncogenic pathways of clear cell renal cell carcinoma through the anatomical (PADUA) scoring system. Oncotarget. 2016. (link)
  3. Shinagare AB, Vikram R, Jaffe C, Akin O, Kirby J, Huang E, Freymann J, Sainani NI, Sadow CA, Bathala TK. Radiogenomics of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: preliminary findings of The Cancer Genome Atlas–Renal Cell Carcinoma (TCGA–RCC) Imaging Research Group. Abdominal imaging. 2015:1-9.

...