Figures & data
Figure 1. Parametric maps estimated by DCE-CT (top row) and the corresponding parametric maps estimated by DCE-MRI (bottom row) using the population-based AIF by Parker et al. [Citation16].
![Figure 1. Parametric maps estimated by DCE-CT (top row) and the corresponding parametric maps estimated by DCE-MRI (bottom row) using the population-based AIF by Parker et al. [Citation16].](/cms/asset/a67a3cdd-4ec2-492f-8647-d42c08f3c747/ionc_a_813637_f0001_b.jpg)
Figure 2. Bland-Altman plots (left) and corresponding scatter plots (right) for Ktrans and ve measured by CT and MRI (using the Parker AIF [Citation16]). The mean voxelwise differences, prediction interval and confidence interval is denoted in bold solid black, solid black and gray line, respectively.
![Figure 2. Bland-Altman plots (left) and corresponding scatter plots (right) for Ktrans and ve measured by CT and MRI (using the Parker AIF [Citation16]). The mean voxelwise differences, prediction interval and confidence interval is denoted in bold solid black, solid black and gray line, respectively.](/cms/asset/77ff8435-cf5d-4d07-adc7-e4860d15ac10/ionc_a_813637_f0002_b.gif)
Table I. Comparison of DCE-CT and -MRI parameter estimates. (*) significant correlation.
Table II. Interpatient variation of AIF observables.
Figure 3. Example of Γ-analysis. A Γ-value > 1 fails the set criteria while Γ-value = 0 corresponds to perfect agreement between the two measures (A) shows the Γ-value using the criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement and 5% uncertainty (B) Γ-value using the criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement and 10% uncertainty. (C) Γ-value using the criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement and 15% uncertainty. (D) Ktrans map estimated using DCE-CT. (E) Ktrans map estimated using DCE-MRI and the Parker et al. AIF [Citation16]. (F) Γ-failure rates for the different tested criteria.
![Figure 3. Example of Γ-analysis. A Γ-value > 1 fails the set criteria while Γ-value = 0 corresponds to perfect agreement between the two measures (A) shows the Γ-value using the criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement and 5% uncertainty (B) Γ-value using the criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement and 10% uncertainty. (C) Γ-value using the criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement and 15% uncertainty. (D) Ktrans map estimated using DCE-CT. (E) Ktrans map estimated using DCE-MRI and the Parker et al. AIF [Citation16]. (F) Γ-failure rates for the different tested criteria.](/cms/asset/aa8bd51d-461c-4010-a6e2-f9df7fe4546a/ionc_a_813637_f0003_b.jpg)
Figure 4. Box-plots for Γ-analysis comparing parametric maps derived using DCE-CT and DCE-MRI with the Parker AIF [Citation16]. The central mark is the median, the edges of the box are the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the range of the whiskers includes 99.3 percentiles of the data. ‘+’ denotes the outliers.
![Figure 4. Box-plots for Γ-analysis comparing parametric maps derived using DCE-CT and DCE-MRI with the Parker AIF [Citation16]. The central mark is the median, the edges of the box are the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the range of the whiskers includes 99.3 percentiles of the data. ‘+’ denotes the outliers.](/cms/asset/7142a432-bed6-4400-b000-c80d1b6d1c85/ionc_a_813637_f0004_b.gif)