The Marburg-Münster Affective Disorders Cohort Study (MACS): A quality assurance protocol for MR neuroimaging data

• Published in: NeuroImage (Orlando, Fla.) Vol. 172; pp. 450 - 460
• Main Authors: Vogelbacher, Christoph, Möbius, Thomas W.D., Sommer, Jens, Schuster, Verena, Dannlowski, Udo, Kircher, Tilo, Dempfle, Astrid, Jansen, Andreas, Bopp, Miriam H.A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 15.05.2018; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Adult; Affective disorders; Basal ganglia; Bipolar disorder; Cohort analysis; Cohort Studies; Computer programs; Consortia; Data analysis; DTI; Female; fMRI; Functional magnetic resonance imaging; Grants; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - instrumentation; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - standards; Major depression; Male; Medical imaging; Mood Disorders - diagnostic imaging; Morphometry; MRI quality assurance; Multicenter Studies as Topic - instrumentation; Multicenter Studies as Topic - methods; Multicenter Studies as Topic - standards; Multicenter study; Neurobiology; Neuroimaging; Neuroimaging - instrumentation; Neuroimaging - methods; Neuroimaging - standards; NMR; Nuclear magnetic resonance; Quality assurance; Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods; Quality Assurance, Health Care - standards; Quality control; Reproducibility of Results; Scanners; Scanning; Software; Statistics; Substantia alba; Substantia grisea; Thalamus; Young Adult; DTI; fMRI; Bipolar disorder; MRI quality assurance; Major depression; Multicenter study
• ISSN: 1053-8119; 1095-9572; 1095-9572
• DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.01.079

Large, longitudinal, multi-center MR neuroimaging studies require comprehensive quality assurance (QA) protocols for assessing the general quality of the compiled data, indicating potential malfunctions in the scanning equipment, and evaluating inter-site differences that need to be accounted for in subsequent analyses. We describe the implementation of a QA protocol for functional magnet resonance imaging (fMRI) data based on the regular measurement of an MRI phantom and an extensive variety of currently published QA statistics. The protocol is implemented in the MACS (Marburg-Münster Affective Disorders Cohort Study, http://for2107.de/), a two-center research consortium studying the neurobiological foundations of affective disorders. Between February 2015 and October 2016, 1214 phantom measurements have been acquired using a standard fMRI protocol. Using 444 healthy control subjects which have been measured between 2014 and 2016 in the cohort, we investigate the extent of between-site differences in contrast to the dependence on subject-specific covariates (age and sex) for structural MRI, fMRI, and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) data. We show that most of the presented QA statistics differ severely not only between the two scanners used for the cohort but also between experimental settings (e.g. hardware and software changes), demonstrate that some of these statistics depend on external variables (e.g. time of day, temperature), highlight their strong dependence on proper handling of the MRI phantom, and show how the use of a phantom holder may balance this dependence. Site effects, however, do not only exist for the phantom data, but also for human MRI data. Using T1-weighted structural images, we show that total intracranial (TIV), grey matter (GMV), and white matter (WMV) volumes significantly differ between the MR scanners, showing large effect sizes. Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analyses show that these structural differences observed between scanners are most pronounced in the bilateral basal ganglia, thalamus, and posterior regions. Using DTI data, we also show that fractional anisotropy (FA) differs between sites in almost all regions assessed. When pooling data from multiple centers, our data show that it is a necessity to account not only for inter-site differences but also for hardware and software changes of the scanning equipment. Also, the strong dependence of the QA statistics on the reliable placement of the MRI phantom shows that the use of a phantom holder is recommended to reduce the variance of the QA statistics and thus to increase the probability of detecting potential scanner malfunctions. •Quality assurance (QA) protocol for large, longitudinal, multi-center MR neuroimaging studies.•Dependence of QA statistics on MR-scanner type, hardware and software changes and external variables (e.g., time of day, temperature).•Consequences of phantom data variations for human MRI data.•Dependence of MR phantom placement on QA statistics.