Face recognition from research brain PET: An unexpected PET problem.
Face recognition from research brain PET: An unexpected PET problem.
复制标题
DOI:
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119357
复制
发表时间:
2022-09
期刊:
影响因子:
5.7
通讯作者:
Jack Jr, Clifford R.
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Schwarz, Christopher G.;Kremers, Walter K.;Lowe, Val J.;Savvides, Marios;Gunter, Jeffrey L.;Senjem, Matthew L.;Vemuri, Prashanthi;Kantarci, Kejal;Knopman, David S.;Petersen, Ronald C.;Jack Jr, Clifford R.
It is well known that de-identified research brain images from MRI and CT can potentially be re-identified using face recognition; however, this has not been examined for PET images. We generated face reconstruction images of 182 volunteers using amyloid, tau, and FDG PET scans, and we measured how accurately commercial face recognition software (Microsoft Azure’s Face API) automatically matched them with the individual participants’ face photographs. We then compared this accuracy with the same experiments using participants’ CT and MRI. Face reconstructions from PET images from PET/CT scanners were correctly matched at rates of 42% (FDG), 35% (tau), and 32% (amyloid), while CT were matched at 78% and MRI at 97–98%. We propose that these recognition rates are high enough that research studies should consider using face de-identification (“de-facing”) software on PET images, in addition to CT and structural MRI, before data sharing. We also updated our mri_reface de-identification software with extended functionality to replace face imagery in PET and CT images. Rates of face recognition on de-faced images were reduced to 0–4% for PET, 5% for CT, and 8% for MRI. We measured the effects of de-facing on regional amyloid PET measurements from two different measurement pipelines (PETSurfer/FreeSurfer 6.0, and one in-house method based on SPM12 and ANTs), and these effects were small: ICC values between de-faced and original images were > 0.98, biases were <2%, and median relative errors were <2%. Effects on global amyloid PET SUVR measurements were even smaller: ICC values were 1.00, biases were <0.5%, and median relative errors were also <0.5%.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
4.8
作者:
Buimer EEL;Schnack HG;Caspi Y;van Haren NEM;Milchenko M;Pas P;Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative;Hulshoff Pol HE;Brouwer RM
通讯作者:
Brouwer RM
DOI:
10.1016/j.jalz.2015.05.001
发表时间:
2015-07
期刊:
Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association
影响因子:
--
作者:
Jagust WJ;Landau SM;Koeppe RA;Reiman EM;Chen K;Mathis CA;Price JC;Foster NL;Wang AY
通讯作者:
Wang AY
影响因子:
10.6
作者:
Juefei-Xu, Felix;Luu, Khoa;Savvides, Marios
通讯作者:
Savvides, Marios
DOI:
10.1016/j.jalz.2010.03.003
发表时间:
2010-05
期刊:
Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association
影响因子:
--
作者:
Jagust WJ;Bandy D;Chen K;Foster NL;Landau SM;Mathis CA;Price JC;Reiman EM;Skovronsky D;Koeppe RA;Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
通讯作者:
Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
影响因子:
5.7
作者:
Fischl, Bruce
通讯作者:
Fischl, Bruce