Spline Baseline Model Flexibility Independently Affects the Accuracy and Precision of In Vivo Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectral Fitting in a Metabolite‐Specific Manner Not Visually Predicted by Fit Residuals

In vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (<sup>1</sup>H-MRS) data often exhibit baselines or low-amplitude signal variations resulting from residual water, imperfectly suppressed lipids, low-amplitude metabolites not considered for fitting, and other features not represented in a basis set. While multitudinous approaches exist to model these baselines in <sup>1</sup>H-MR spectral analysis, many continue to lack systematic validation against varied and realistic ground-truth standards. Here, we compare the accuracy (error mean) and precision (error standard deviation) of metabolite scaling estimates by linear combination modeling (LCM) spectral fitting accounting for spectral baselines via smoothed cubic splines at 50 different combinations of fixed knot interval and smoothing weight, either with or without additionally simulated Gaussian basis signals to separately model spectral macromolecules. Synthesized in-vivo-like metabolite brain spectra incorporating macromolecule signals measured using double-inversion-recovery-prepared sLASER (T<sub>E</sub> 20.1 ms; T<sub>R</sub> 2 s; T<sub>I1</sub> 920 ms; T<sub>I2</sub> 330 ms) at 3 T from single voxels in the frontal and occipital cortex of 10 healthy volunteers (five female; 23 ± 5 y.o.) provided both in vivo realism and a standard ground truth for error calculation. Optimal baseline flexibility differed both by definition of "optimum" as either accuracy or precision and by metabolite. Regardless of definition or metabolite, optimal models were not those yielding the smallest fit residuals. Optimized spline baseline definitions yielded high accuracies (lowest mean error -0.003 ± 2.1% for total N-acetyl aspartate and highest mean error 10.1 ± 19.2% for glutamate + glutamine within fits including macromolecule bases) as well as comparable precision for most metabolites to fits achieved in LCModel; inclusion of simulated macromolecules in baseline models improved maximum fit precision but not accuracy. Taken together, these data illustrate that optimized spline baseline model flexibility exhibits metabolite-specific relationships with <sup>1</sup>H-MR spectral quantification accuracy or precision not readily predicted by visual inspection of associated fit residuals and not necessarily improved by adaptive relative to absolute constraints.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NMR in Biomedicine
Published
2025-03-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.70010
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.36

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Spline Baseline Model Flexibility Independently Affects the Accuracy and Precision of In Vivo Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectral Fitting in a Metabolite‐Specific Manner Not Visually Predicted by Fit Residuals

Christoph Juchem, Karl Landheer, Martin Gajdošík, Kelley M. Swanberg et al.
1 citations
NMR in Biomedicine
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
1.36
article

Spline Baseline Model Flexibility Independently Affects the Accuracy and Precision of In Vivo Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectral Fitting in a Metabolite‐Specific Manner Not Visually Predicted by Fit Residuals

Christoph Juchem, Karl Landheer, Martin Gajdošík, Kelley M. Swanberg, Michael Treacy
article en
1 citations

Abstract

In vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (<sup>1</sup>H-MRS) data often exhibit baselines or low-amplitude signal variations resulting from residual water, imperfectly suppressed lipids, low-amplitude metabolites not considered for fitting, and other features not represented in a basis set. While multitudinous approaches exist to model these baselines in <sup>1</sup>H-MR spectral analysis, many continue to lack systematic validation against varied and realistic ground-truth standards. Here, we compare the accuracy (error mean) and precision (error standard deviation) of metabolite scaling estimates by linear combination modeling (LCM) spectral fitting accounting for spectral baselines via smoothed cubic splines at 50 different combinations of fixed knot interval and smoothing weight, either with or without additionally simulated Gaussian basis signals to separately model spectral macromolecules. Synthesized in-vivo-like metabolite brain spectra incorporating macromolecule signals measured using double-inversion-recovery-prepared sLASER (T<sub>E</sub> 20.1 ms; T<sub>R</sub> 2 s; T<sub>I1</sub> 920 ms; T<sub>I2</sub> 330 ms) at 3 T from single voxels in the frontal and occipital cortex of 10 healthy volunteers (five female; 23 ± 5 y.o.) provided both in vivo realism and a standard ground truth for error calculation. Optimal baseline flexibility differed both by definition of "optimum" as either accuracy or precision and by metabolite. Regardless of definition or metabolite, optimal models were not those yielding the smallest fit residuals. Optimized spline baseline definitions yielded high accuracies (lowest mean error -0.003 ± 2.1% for total N-acetyl aspartate and highest mean error 10.1 ± 19.2% for glutamate + glutamine within fits including macromolecule bases) as well as comparable precision for most metabolites to fits achieved in LCModel; inclusion of simulated macromolecules in baseline models improved maximum fit precision but not accuracy. Taken together, these data illustrate that optimized spline baseline model flexibility exhibits metabolite-specific relationships with <sup>1</sup>H-MR spectral quantification accuracy or precision not readily predicted by visual inspection of associated fit residuals and not necessarily improved by adaptive relative to absolute constraints.

NMR in BiomedicineVol. 38(4)
Medical University of Vienna (AT), Columbia University (US)
National Institutes of Health, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
1.36
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.