Influence of Basis Set Composition on Metabolite Quantification of <sup>1</sup> H‐MRS at 3 T: Combining In Silico, In Vivo and In Vitro Evidence

Magnetic resonance spectra are quantified by model fitting in the time or frequency domain to a basis set consisting of metabolites present in the measured sample. Despite some work on basis set composition, it remains unclear which metabolite components should be included in the basis set models and how these impact the quantification of key metabolites such as glutamate (Glu). This lack of consensus contributes to reproducibility issues across research groups. Here, we use synthetic, human brain and phantom data to assess how basis set choice impacts quantification, focusing on the bias-variance trade-off under different SNR conditions. Simulated 1D spectra mimicking in vivo human brain data at 3 T were used to identify basis models that minimise bias and variance for our four key metabolites of interest: Glu, creatine (tCr), choline-containing compounds (tCho) and N-acetylaspartate (tNAA) under increasing noise levels. This informed analyses of human brain and phantom data collected at 3 T over 81 and 120 min, respectively, using PRESS. We find that basis set composition significantly affected Glu, tCr, tCho and tNAA concentrations. Specifically, the inclusion of γ-aminobutyric acid, glutathione, N-acetylaspartylglutamate and glucose improved Glu quantification, achieving bias and variance below 10%. Including partner metabolites for tCr and tNAA (phosphocreatine and N-acetylaspartylglutamate) offered no significant benefit. In contrast, tCho quantification remained inconsistent likely due to spectral overlap. We show that minimal basis set models provide accurate quantification while reducing variance. However, the number of metabolites accurately modelled depends on data quality and SNR. High-SNR spectra enable the inclusion of additional metabolites, while low-SNR data risk overfitting. Differences in metabolite concentrations reported in the literature may partly reflect variations in prior knowledge models, emphasising the need for clear descriptions of analysis methods in MRS research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NMR in Biomedicine
Published
2026-02-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.70230
Primary Topic
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Influence of Basis Set Composition on Metabolite Quantification of 1 H‐MRS at 3 T: Combining In Silico, In Vivo and In Vitro Evidence

Stephen R. Williams, Laura M. Parkes, Polina Emeliyanova, Caroline Lea‐Carnall
NMR in Biomedicine
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
article

Influence of Basis Set Composition on Metabolite Quantification of 1 H‐MRS at 3 T: Combining In Silico, In Vivo and In Vitro Evidence

Stephen R. Williams, Laura M. Parkes, Polina Emeliyanova, Caroline Lea‐Carnall
article en

Abstract

Magnetic resonance spectra are quantified by model fitting in the time or frequency domain to a basis set consisting of metabolites present in the measured sample. Despite some work on basis set composition, it remains unclear which metabolite components should be included in the basis set models and how these impact the quantification of key metabolites such as glutamate (Glu). This lack of consensus contributes to reproducibility issues across research groups. Here, we use synthetic, human brain and phantom data to assess how basis set choice impacts quantification, focusing on the bias-variance trade-off under different SNR conditions. Simulated 1D spectra mimicking in vivo human brain data at 3 T were used to identify basis models that minimise bias and variance for our four key metabolites of interest: Glu, creatine (tCr), choline-containing compounds (tCho) and N-acetylaspartate (tNAA) under increasing noise levels. This informed analyses of human brain and phantom data collected at 3 T over 81 and 120 min, respectively, using PRESS. We find that basis set composition significantly affected Glu, tCr, tCho and tNAA concentrations. Specifically, the inclusion of γ-aminobutyric acid, glutathione, N-acetylaspartylglutamate and glucose improved Glu quantification, achieving bias and variance below 10%. Including partner metabolites for tCr and tNAA (phosphocreatine and N-acetylaspartylglutamate) offered no significant benefit. In contrast, tCho quantification remained inconsistent likely due to spectral overlap. We show that minimal basis set models provide accurate quantification while reducing variance. However, the number of metabolites accurately modelled depends on data quality and SNR. High-SNR spectra enable the inclusion of additional metabolites, while low-SNR data risk overfitting. Differences in metabolite concentrations reported in the literature may partly reflect variations in prior knowledge models, emphasising the need for clear descriptions of analysis methods in MRS research.

NMR in BiomedicineVol. 39(3)
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB), University of Manchester (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
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.