Evaluation of ComBat harmonization for reducing across-tracer differences in regional amyloid PET analyses

Braden Yang,Tom Earnest,Sayantan Kumar,Deydeep Kothapalli,Tammie Benzinger,Brian Gordon,Aristeidis Sotiras

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.14.24308952

2024-10-07

Abstract:Introduction Differences in amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) radiotracer pharmacokinetics and binding properties lead to discrepancies in amyloid-β uptake estimates. Harmonization of tracer-specific biases is crucial for optimal performance of downstream tasks. Here, we investigated the efficacy of ComBat, a data-driven harmonization model, for reducing tracer-specific biases in regional amyloid PET measurements from [18F]-florbetapir (FBP) and [11C]-Pittsburgh Compound-B (PiB). Methods One-hundred-thirteen head-to-head FBP-PiB scan pairs, scanned from the same subject within ninety days, were selected from the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies 3 (OASIS-3) dataset. The Centiloid scale, ComBat with no covariates, ComBat with biological covariates, and GAM-ComBat with biological covariates were used to harmonize both global and regional amyloid standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR). Variants of ComBat, including longitudinal ComBat and PEACE, were also tested. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and mean absolute error (MAE) were computed to measure the absolute agreement between tracers. Additionally, longitudinal amyloid SUVRs from an anti-amyloid drug trial were simulated using linear mixed effects modeling. Differences in rates-of-change between simulated treatment and placebo groups were tested, and change in statistical power/Type-I error after harmonization was quantified. Results In the head-to-head tracer comparison, ComBat with no covariates was the best at increasing ICC and decreasing MAE of both global summary and regional amyloid PET SUVRs between scan pairs of the same group of subjects. In the clinical trial simulation, harmonization with both Centiloid and ComBat increased statistical power of detecting true rate-of-change differences between groups and decreased false discovery rate in the absence of a treatment effect. The greatest benefit of harmonization was observed when groups exhibited differing FBP-to-PiB proportions. Conclusion ComBat outperformed the Centiloid scale in harmonizing both global and regional amyloid estimates. Additionally, ComBat improved the detection of rate-of-change differences between clinical trial groups. Our findings suggest that ComBat is a viable alternative to Centiloid for harmonizing regional amyloid PET analyses.

Radiology and Imaging