Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging is a fundamental tool in the diagnosis and management of neurological diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS). New portable, low-field MRI scanners could potentially lower financial and technical barriers to neuroimaging and reach underserved or disabled populations. However, the sensitivity of low-field MRI for MS lesions is unknown. We sought to determine if white matter lesions can be detected on a 64mT low-field MRI, compare automated lesion segmentations and total lesion burden between paired 3T and 64mT scans, and identify features that contribute to lesion detection accuracy. In this prospective, cross-sectional study, same-day brain MRI (FLAIR, T1, and T2) scans were collected from 36 adults (32 women; mean age, 50 ± 14 years) with known or suspected MS using 3T (Siemens) and 64mT (Hyperfine) scanners at two centers. Images were reviewed by neuroradiologists. MS lesions were measured manually and segmented using an automated algorithm. Statistical analyses assessed accuracy and variability of segmentations across scanners and systematic scanner biases in automated volumetric measurements. Lesions were identified on 64mT scans in 94% (31/33) of patients with confirmed MS. The smallest lesions manually detected were 5.7 ± 1.3 mm in maximum diameter at 64mT vs 2.1 ± 0.6 mm at 3T. Automated lesion burden estimates were highly correlated between 3T and 64mT scans (r = 0.89, p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis identified bias in 64mT segmentations (mean = 1.6 ml, standard error = 5.2 ml, limits of agreement = -19.0–15.9 ml), which over-estimated low lesion burden and under-estimated high burden (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). Visual inspection revealed over-segmentation was driven by flow-related hyperintensities in veins on 64mT FLAIR. Lesion size drove segmentation accuracy, with 93% of lesions >1.0 ml and all lesions >1.5 ml being detected. These results demonstrate that in established MS, a portable 64mT MRI scanner can identify white matter lesions, and disease burden estimates are consistent with 3T scans.
Highlights
Paired, same-day 3T and 64mT MRI studies were collected in 36 patients
64mT MRI showed 94% sensitivity for detecting any lesions in established MS cases
The diameter of the smallest detected lesion was larger at 64mT compared to 3T
Disease burden estimates were strongly correlated between 3T and 64mT scans
Low-field MRI can detect white matter lesions, though smaller lesions may be missed
Competing Interest Statement
Samantha By is a former employee of Hyperfine and works for Bristol Myers Squibb. Russell T. Shinohara receives consulting income from Octave Bioscience, compensation for reviewing scientific articles from the American Medical Association and for reviewing grants for the Emerson Collective, National Institutes of Health, and the Department of Defense. Daniel S. Reich is supported by the Intramural Research Program of NINDS and additional research support from Abata Therapeutics, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Joel M. Stein has two sponsored research agreements with Hyperfine and receives consulting income from Centaur Diagnostics, Inc.
Funding Statement
T. Campbell Arnold was funded in part by the HHMI-NIBIB Interfaces Initiative (T32-EB009384). This study received support from a research services agreement between Hyperfine, Inc. and the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania (JMS - principal investigator). The study was partially funded by the Intramural Research Program of NINDS/NIH.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Board of the University of Pennsylvania and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke gave ethical approval for this work, and all patients provided written, informed consent.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data generated in this study can be made available, with protected health information removed, upon reasonable request to the corresponding author and with a data sharing agreement between institutions in place.
