Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study is being conducted for evaluation of 3D Synthetic MRI (SyMRI 15, 3D) for neuroimaging,
This study is a prospective, blinded, multi-center, multi-reader clinical study that is statistically powered for demonstrating non-inferiority of synthetic 3D MR images compared to conventional MR images with respect to sensitivity and specificity of pathological findings.
The study consists of three parts:
The study will enroll eligible subjects with an already scheduled brain MRI and also healthy volunteers, that meet applicable site MR safety criteria. The routine MRI scan will include approximately 5-20 minutes extra time for the additional images to be taken. This time will be added to the length of the scheduled scan. It is only the time in the MRI scanner that will differ from standard procedures, no other examinations will be performed.
The study consists of one visit, without additional follow-up.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neurologic Synthetic and Conventional MRI | Experimental | MR images of the brain acquired for post-processing with software (SyMRI 15, 3D). Comparison is done between the conventional MR images and the post-processed synthetic MR images |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SyMRI 15 (3D) | Device | Neurological MRI image collection |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity of Pathological Findings (Full Analysis Set) | Sensitivity of pathological findings (true number of participants with pathological findings over assessed number of participants with pathological findings by reader) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Specificity of Pathological Findings (Full Analysis Set) | Specificity of pathological findings (true number of participants with normal/no finding over assessed number of participants with normal/no finding by reader) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Classification of Pathological Findings | Diagnostic accuracy of radiological findings (radiological finding class) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Legibility T1w (Full Analysis Set) | Legibility of anatomical structures, per structure, on the full analysis set for T1w images. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each anatomical structure per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey H Miller, MD | Phoenix Children's Hospital | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phoenix Children's hospital | Phoenix | Arizona | 85016 | United States | ||
| ProScan Imaging |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Neurological MRI | MR images of the brain acquired for post-processing with software (SyMRI 15, 3D). Comparison is done between the conventional MR images and the post-processed synthetic MR images SyMRI 15 (3D): Neurological MRI image collection. All participants with complete set of scans that was part of the image review study. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Neurological MRI Synthetic | MR images of the brain acquired for post-processing with software (SyMRI 15, 3D). Comparison is done between the conventional MR images and the post-processed synthetic MR images SyMRI 15 (3D): Neurological MRI image collection. All participants with complete set of scans that was part of the image review study. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Sensitivity of Pathological Findings (Full Analysis Set) | Sensitivity of pathological findings (true number of participants with pathological findings over assessed number of participants with pathological findings by reader) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
Exam day (1 day), Generation of Synthetic Images (up to 7 weeks)
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Neurologic Synthetic and Conventional MRI | MR images of the brain acquired for post-processing with software (SyMRI 15, 3D). Comparison is done between the conventional MR images and the post-processed synthetic MR images SyMRI 15 (3D): Neurological MRI image collection. All participants with complete set of scans that was part of the image review study. |
Not provided
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Device Deficiencies | Product Issues | Systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Erik Lange | SyntheticMR | +46(0)70-331 56 78 | erik.lange@syntheticmr.com |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Dec 21, 2023 | Jan 22, 2025 | Prot_SAP_002.pdf |
| ICF | No | No | Yes | Informed Consent Form | Dec 21, 2023 | Jan 22, 2025 | ICF_003.pdf |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Subjects will be enrolled from the general imaging population scheduled for an MRI of the brain and healthy volunteers, using the scanner available at the investigational sites. A conventional MRI scan of the brain is taken, and an additional sequence that is processed into synthetic MR images. The conventional and the synthetic MR images from the same subject is compared.
Not provided
Not provided
For each subject, conventional and synthetic images will be assessed by blinded, experienced neuroradiologists who will assess the images with regards to radiological findings, image quality, legibility of anatomical structures, and artifacts. The readings will be separated into two reading sessions with a 4-week memory-washout period.
Not provided
| Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Sensitivity (Adult Population) | Sensitivity of pathological findings (true number of participants with pathological findings over assessed number of participants with pathological findings) for synthetic and conventional MR images in adult population (18-99 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Selectivity (Adult Population) | Specificity of pathological findings (true number of participants with normal/no finding over assessed number of participants with normal/no finding) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the in adult population (18-99 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Classification of Pathological Findings (Adult Population) | Diagnostic accuracy of radiological findings (radiological finding class) for synthetic and conventional MR images in adult population (18-99 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Sensitivity (Pediatric Population) | Sensitivity of pathological findings (true number of participants with pathological findings over assessed number of participants with pathological findings) for synthetic and conventional MR images in pediatric population (0-17 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Selectivity (Pediatric Population) | Specificity of pathological findings (true number of participants with normal/no finding over assessed number of participants with normal/no finding) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the in pediatric population (0-17 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Classification of Pathological Findings (Pediatric Population) | Diagnostic accuracy of radiological findings (radiological finding class) for synthetic and conventional MR images in pediatric population (0-17 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Legibility T2w (Full Analysis Set) | Legibility of anatomical structures, per structure, on the full analysis set for T2w images. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each anatomical structure per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Artifacts T1w(Full Analysis Set) | Presence and type of artifacts determined for synthetic T1w images, on the full analysis set determined by all readers. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each artifact per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Artifacts T2w(Full Analysis Set) | Presence and type of artifacts determined for synthetic T2w images, on the full analysis set determined by all readers. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each artifact per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Inter-rater Agreement (Full Analysis Set) | Inter-rater agreement between all reader's assessment of pathological finding, as well as radiological finding classes, on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader and the agreement is independent of reading session. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The agreement was assessed separately per image type over both reading periods using overall agreement, Fleiss' kappa coefficient, and Gwet's AC1 coefficient. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Inter-method Agreement (Full Analysis Set) | Inter-method agreement between the different reader's assessment of pathological finding, as well as radiological finding classes, on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The agreement was evaluated for all images, independent of reading period and image type, using overall agreement, Fleiss' kappa coefficient, and Gwet's AC1 coefficient. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Image Quality Score (Full Analysis Set) | Image quality score (1 (Unacceptable) - 5 (Excellent)) per contrast weighting (T1w, T2w) per both image types (conventional and synthetic) where 3,4,5 are deemed acceptable for diagnostic use and 1,2 unacceptable for diagnostic use. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result presented, independent of reading period, is the averaged score per contrast weight and image type with the standard deviation. | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
| Safety (Full Analysis Set) | Incidence of Adverse Events (AE), Adverse Device Effects (ADE), Serious Adverse Events (SAE), Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADE), Unanticipated Adverse Device Effect (UADE), Unanticipated Serious Adverse Device Effect (USADE) and Device Deficiencies (DD). The measurement was assessed in two periods: during exam day after signing consent form (all incidents applicable) and when generating the synthetic images (only device deficiencies) after all exams were performed. | Exam day (1 day), Generation of Synthetic Images (up to 7 weeks) |
| Naples |
| Florida |
| 34110 |
| United States |
| Nemours Children's Health, Nemours Children's Hospital, Florida | Orlando | Florida | 32827 | United States |
| SimonMed imaging Streeterville | Chicago | Illinois | 606117110 | United States |
| Dent Neurosciences Research Center | New York | New York | 14226 | United States |
| Diagnostic Imaging Sciences Center (DISC) University of Washington Medical Center (UWMC) | Seattle | Washington | 98195 | United States |
| years |
|
| Age, Customized | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected | Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant. | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Pathological finding | Based upon the site-determined diagnosis, considered to be the ground truth | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Anaesthesia used | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
MR images of the brain acquired for post-processing with software (SyMRI 15, 3D).
Comparison is done between the conventional MR images and the post-processed synthetic MR images
SyMRI 15 (3D): Neurological MRI image collection. All participants with complete set of scans that was part of the image review study.
|
|
| Primary | Specificity of Pathological Findings (Full Analysis Set) | Specificity of pathological findings (true number of participants with normal/no finding over assessed number of participants with normal/no finding by reader) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Classification of Pathological Findings | Diagnostic accuracy of radiological findings (radiological finding class) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Sensitivity (Adult Population) | Sensitivity of pathological findings (true number of participants with pathological findings over assessed number of participants with pathological findings) for synthetic and conventional MR images in adult population (18-99 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Adult subpopulation 18-99 years | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Selectivity (Adult Population) | Specificity of pathological findings (true number of participants with normal/no finding over assessed number of participants with normal/no finding) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the in adult population (18-99 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Adult subpopulation 18-99 years | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Classification of Pathological Findings (Adult Population) | Diagnostic accuracy of radiological findings (radiological finding class) for synthetic and conventional MR images in adult population (18-99 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Adult subpopulation 18-99 years | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Sensitivity (Pediatric Population) | Sensitivity of pathological findings (true number of participants with pathological findings over assessed number of participants with pathological findings) for synthetic and conventional MR images in pediatric population (0-17 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Pediatric subpopulation 0-17 years | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Selectivity (Pediatric Population) | Specificity of pathological findings (true number of participants with normal/no finding over assessed number of participants with normal/no finding) for synthetic and conventional MR images on the in pediatric population (0-17 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Pediatric subpopulation 0-17 years | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Classification of Pathological Findings (Pediatric Population) | Diagnostic accuracy of radiological findings (radiological finding class) for synthetic and conventional MR images in pediatric population (0-17 years). Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The ground truth is the site-determined diagnosis. | Pediatric subpopulation 0-17 years | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Legibility T1w (Full Analysis Set) | Legibility of anatomical structures, per structure, on the full analysis set for T1w images. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each anatomical structure per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Posted | Count of Units | Number of observations | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 | Number of observations | Number of observations |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Legibility T2w (Full Analysis Set) | Legibility of anatomical structures, per structure, on the full analysis set for T2w images. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each anatomical structure per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Posted | Count of Units | Number of observations | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 | Number of observations | Number of observations |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Artifacts T1w(Full Analysis Set) | Presence and type of artifacts determined for synthetic T1w images, on the full analysis set determined by all readers. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each artifact per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Posted | Count of Units | Number of observations | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 | Number of observations | Number of observations |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Artifacts T2w(Full Analysis Set) | Presence and type of artifacts determined for synthetic T2w images, on the full analysis set determined by all readers. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result for each artifact per image type, independent of reading period, is summarized in corresponding row below. | Posted | Count of Units | Number of observations | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 | Number of observations | Number of observations |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Inter-rater Agreement (Full Analysis Set) | Inter-rater agreement between all reader's assessment of pathological finding, as well as radiological finding classes, on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader and the agreement is independent of reading session. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The agreement was assessed separately per image type over both reading periods using overall agreement, Fleiss' kappa coefficient, and Gwet's AC1 coefficient. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Inter-method Agreement (Full Analysis Set) | Inter-method agreement between the different reader's assessment of pathological finding, as well as radiological finding classes, on the full analysis set. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The agreement was evaluated for all images, independent of reading period and image type, using overall agreement, Fleiss' kappa coefficient, and Gwet's AC1 coefficient. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | Proportion of participants | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Image Quality Score (Full Analysis Set) | Image quality score (1 (Unacceptable) - 5 (Excellent)) per contrast weighting (T1w, T2w) per both image types (conventional and synthetic) where 3,4,5 are deemed acceptable for diagnostic use and 1,2 unacceptable for diagnostic use. Each image was evaluated only once per reader. The images were split between two readings, with a wash-out period of 4 weeks in between. Both readings contained both types of images, synthetic and conventional. The first reading begun after all image processing was complete. The result presented, independent of reading period, is the averaged score per contrast weight and image type with the standard deviation. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | score on a scale | Conventional images and necessary MRI information acquired from participant on exam day (1 day). Synthetic images generated before first reading. Analysis by readers in two readings, first reading: week 0-2, second reading: week 7-8 |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Safety (Full Analysis Set) | Incidence of Adverse Events (AE), Adverse Device Effects (ADE), Serious Adverse Events (SAE), Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADE), Unanticipated Adverse Device Effect (UADE), Unanticipated Serious Adverse Device Effect (USADE) and Device Deficiencies (DD). The measurement was assessed in two periods: during exam day after signing consent form (all incidents applicable) and when generating the synthetic images (only device deficiencies) after all exams were performed. | Posted | Number | events | Exam day (1 day), Generation of Synthetic Images (up to 7 weeks) |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 189 |
| 0 |
| 189 |
| 1 |
| 189 |
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| Head of caudate nucleus : Synthetic |
|
| Middle cerebellar peducle : Synthetic |
|
| Posterior limb of internal capsule : Synthetic |
|
| Central sulcus : Conventional |
|
| Cerebral peduncle : Conventional |
|
| Cervicomedullary junction : Conventional |
|
| Head of caudate nucleus : Conventional |
|
| Middle cerebellar peducle : Conventional |
|
| Posterior limb of internal capsule : Conventional |
|
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| Head of caudate nucleus : Synthetic |
|
| Middle cerebellar peducle : Synthetic |
|
| Posterior limb of internal capsule : Synthetic |
|
| Central sulcus : Conventional |
|
| Cerebral peduncle : Conventional |
|
| Cervicomedullary junction : Conventional |
|
| Head of caudate nucleus : Conventional |
|
| Middle cerebellar peducle : Conventional |
|
| Posterior limb of internal capsule : Conventional |
|
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| Flow or phase-encoding artifacts : Synthetic |
|
| Magic angle effect artifacts : Synthetic |
|
| Water-fat shift/ chemical shift artifacts : Synthetic |
|
| Magnetic susceptibility artifact : Synthetic |
|
| Low resolution : Synthetic |
|
| Low signal to noise : Synthetic |
|
| Low tissue contrast : Synthetic |
|
| No artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Motion artifacts : Conventional |
|
| In-folding or wrap around artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Flow or phase-encoding artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Magic angle effect artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Water-fat shift/ chemical shift artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Magnetic susceptibility artifact : Conventional |
|
| Low resolution : Conventional |
|
| Low signal to noise : Conventional |
|
| Low tissue contrast : Conventional |
|
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| Flow or phase-encoding artifacts : Synthetic |
|
| Magic angle effect artifacts : Synthetic |
|
| Water-fat shift/ chemical shift artifacts : Synthetic |
|
| Magnetic susceptibility artifact : Synthetic |
|
| Low resolution : Synthetic |
|
| Low signal to noise : Synthetic |
|
| Low tissue contrast : Synthetic |
|
| No artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Motion artifacts : Conventional |
|
| In-folding or wrap around artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Flow or phase-encoding artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Magic angle effect artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Water-fat shift/ chemical shift artifacts : Conventional |
|
| Magnetic susceptibility artifact : Conventional |
|
| Low resolution : Conventional |
|
| Low signal to noise : Conventional |
|
| Low tissue contrast : Conventional |
|
|
| Radiological finding class: Overall agreement (Synthetic) |
|
| Radiological finding class: Fleiss' kappa coefficient (Synthetic) |
|
| Radiological finding class: Gwet's AC1 coefficient (Synthetic) |
|
| Pathological finding: Overall agreement (Conventional) |
|
| Pathological finding: Fleiss' kappa coefficient (Conventional) |
|
| Pathological finding: Gwet's AC1 coefficient (Conventional) |
|
| Radiological finding class: Overall agreement (Conventional) |
|
| Radiological finding class: Fleiss' kappa coefficient (Conventional) |
|
| Radiological finding class: Gwet's AC1 coefficient (Conventional) |
|
|
| Radiological finding class: Overall agreement |
|
| Radiological finding class: Fleiss' kappa coefficient |
|
| Radiological finding class: Gwet's AC1 coefficient |
|
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| T2w : Conventional |
|
| Title | Measurements |
|---|---|
|
| Unanticipated Adverse Device Effect (UADE) |
|
| Unanticipated Serious Adverse Device Effect (USADE) |
|
| Device Deficiencies (DD) |
|