A Comparison and Validation of BIDS Apps for Preprocessing of [ 11 C]UCB-J PET data

Background Preprocessing of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) data can be performed in many different ways and often involves manual steps, resulting in reduced comparability across analyses and pipelines. Apps working on PET data organized according to the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) seek to automate preprocessing, enabling the application of standardized pipelines that increase comparability and reproducibility. In this study, two of these apps were validated against in-house software. Methods Data were acquired in-house from 14 subjects who received placebo in a randomized controlled clinical trial and underwent two PET measurements using the radioligand [ 11 C]UCB-J. Preprocessing was performed with two BIDS Apps, PETPrep and PICNIC, as well as an in-house software. Arterial blood data were processed using Bloodstream, and [ 11 C]UCB-J total distribution volume ( V T ) values were calculated using a 1-tissue compartment model using kinfitr. Results V T values for all 9 regions of interest were highly consistent across tools with estimates of Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for consistency ranging between 0.94 and >0.99, although bias between tools measured as signed Percentage Difference was present, ranging from 0.1% - 10.2% depending on the region. Tools performed similarly on test-retest metrics. We observed a negative test-retest bias in [ 11 C]UCB-J V T of unknown origin. Conclusion BIDS Apps produce reliable and consistent results when compared both with each other and with an in-house software optimized for processing and analysis of our in-house data. Region-dependant bias between tools warrants caution for direct comparison of V T between tools. The usage of these apps could enable better comparability across publications

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Published
2026-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.10.28.762181
Primary Topic
Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

A Comparison and Validation of BIDS Apps for Preprocessing of [ 11 C]UCB-J PET data

Max Andersson, Elizabeth A. Bartlett, Granville James Matheson, Niklas K. Edvall et al.
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
preprint

A Comparison and Validation of BIDS Apps for Preprocessing of [ 11 C]UCB-J PET data

Max Andersson, Elizabeth A. Bartlett, Granville James Matheson, Niklas K. Edvall, Francesca Zanderigo, Jeffrey Morris Miller, Carl Johan Ekman, Zsolt Cselényi, Mikael Tiger, Maria Beckman, Johan Lundberg, Hampus Yngwe, Guusje Haver, Martin Noergaard, Mike Schmidt
preprint en

Abstract

Background Preprocessing of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) data can be performed in many different ways and often involves manual steps, resulting in reduced comparability across analyses and pipelines. Apps working on PET data organized according to the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) seek to automate preprocessing, enabling the application of standardized pipelines that increase comparability and reproducibility. In this study, two of these apps were validated against in-house software. Methods Data were acquired in-house from 14 subjects who received placebo in a randomized controlled clinical trial and underwent two PET measurements using the radioligand [ 11 C]UCB-J. Preprocessing was performed with two BIDS Apps, PETPrep and PICNIC, as well as an in-house software. Arterial blood data were processed using Bloodstream, and [ 11 C]UCB-J total distribution volume ( V T ) values were calculated using a 1-tissue compartment model using kinfitr. Results V T values for all 9 regions of interest were highly consistent across tools with estimates of Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for consistency ranging between 0.94 and >0.99, although bias between tools measured as signed Percentage Difference was present, ranging from 0.1% - 10.2% depending on the region. Tools performed similarly on test-retest metrics. We observed a negative test-retest bias in [ 11 C]UCB-J V T of unknown origin. Conclusion BIDS Apps produce reliable and consistent results when compared both with each other and with an in-house software optimized for processing and analysis of our in-house data. Region-dependant bias between tools warrants caution for direct comparison of V T between tools. The usage of these apps could enable better comparability across publications

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
University of Copenhagen (DK), Stockholm County Council (SE), Karolinska Institutet (SE), Stockholm Health Care Services (SE), Columbia University (US)
Medical Imaging 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.

Laika access coming soon