# GAN-Based Cross-Modality Brain MRI Synthesis: Paired Versus Unpaired Training and Comparison with Diffusion and Transformer Models

**Authors:** Behnam Kiani Kalejahi, Sebelan Danishvar, Mohammad Javad Rajabi

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/biomimetics11030175 · Biomimetics · 2026-03-02

## TL;DR

This paper compares different AI models for generating brain MRI images when some data is missing, finding that paired CycleGAN offers a good balance of speed and accuracy.

## Contribution

The study provides a direct comparison of GANs, diffusion models, and transformers for cross-modality MRI synthesis using a standardized dataset and evaluation framework.

## Key findings

- Paired CycleGAN achieved high correlation (r≈0.92–0.93) and SSIM (≈0.90–0.92) with fast inference (<50 ms/slice).
- Unpaired CycleGAN produced clinically interpretable images without supervision but with lower correlation (r≈0.74–0.78) and SSIM (≈0.82–0.85).
- DDPM achieved the highest fidelity (SSIM ≈0.93–0.95) but required more computational resources.

## Abstract

Incomplete or faulty MRI sequences are common in clinical practice and can impair AI-based analyses that rely on complete multi-contrast data. The relative effectiveness of classical generative adversarial networks (GANs) versus modern diffusion and transformer-based models for clinically usable MRI synthesis remains unclear. This study evaluates cross-modality MRI synthesis using the BraTS 2019 brain tumour dataset, focusing on T1-to-T2 translation. We assess paired and unpaired CycleGAN models and compare them with two stronger but computationally intensive baselines, a conditional denoising diffusion probabilistic model (DDPM) and a transformer-enhanced GAN, using identical data splits and preprocessing pipelines. Inter-modality correlation was evaluated to estimate the achievable similarity between modalities. Conceptually, modality synthesis may be viewed as a representation-learning approach that compensates for missing imaging information by reconstructing clinically relevant features from available contrasts. Paired CycleGAN achieved correlations of r≈0.92–0.93  and SSIM ≈0.90–0.92, approaching natural T1–T2 correlation (r≈0.95) while maintaining very fast inference (<50 ms/slice). Unpaired CycleGAN achieved r≈0.74–0.78 and SSIM ≈0.82–0.85, producing clinically interpretable reconstructions without voxel-level supervision. DDPM achieved the highest fidelity (SSIM ≈0.93–0.95, r≈0.94) but required substantially greater computational resources, while transformer-enhanced GAN performance was intermediate. Qualitative analysis showed that CycleGAN and DDPM best preserved tumour and tissue boundaries, whereas unpaired CycleGAN occasionally over-smoothed subtle lesions. These findings highlight the trade-off between fidelity and efficiency in cross-modality MRI synthesis, suggesting paired CycleGAN for time-sensitive clinical workflows and diffusion models as a computationally expensive accuracy upper bound.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** brain tumour (MONDO:0021211)

## Full-text entities

- **Genes:** CYCS (cytochrome c, somatic) [NCBI Gene 54205] {aka CYC, HCS, THC4}
- **Diseases:** inflammatory (MESH:D007249), DDPM (MESH:D004195), skin lesion (MESH:D012871), SSIM (MESH:D020914), Brain Tumor (MESH:D001932), Tumour (MESH:D009369), hallucination (MESH:D006212), oedema (MESH:C536897), injury to (MESH:D014947), Lesion (MESH:D009059)
- **Chemicals:** CycleGAN (-)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]
- **Mutations:** CT-to-T2

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13024612/full.md

## Figures

6 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13024612/full.md

## References

45 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13024612/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13024612