Ductal carcinoma in situ: X-ray fluorescence microscopy and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging reveals gadolinium uptake within neoplastic mammary ducts in a murine model

Radiology

Volumn 253, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 399-406

  Jansen, Sanaz A ^a   Paunesku, Tatjana ^b   Fan, Xiaobing ^a   Woloschak, Gayle E ^b   Vogt, Stefan ^c   Conzen, Suzanne D ^a   Krausz, Thomas ^a   Newstead, Gillian M ^a   Karczmar, Gregory S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GADODIAMIDE; GADOLINIUM; SODIUM CHLORIDE; VIRUS LARGE T ANTIGEN;

ANIMAL CARE; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BREAST; BREAST CARCINOMA; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG UPTAKE; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE MICROSCOPY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; KINETICS; MAMMARY GLAND; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARAMETER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIMIAN VIRUS 40; TRANSGENIC MOUSE; X RAY FLUORESCENCE;

ANIMALS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMARY GLANDS, ANIMAL; MAMMARY NEOPLASMS, EXPERIMENTAL; MICE; MICE, TRANSGENIC; MICROSCOPY, FLUORESCENCE; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE;

EID: 77950136039     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2533082026     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57:75-89.
2. Gilles R, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, et al. Clustered breast microcalcifications: evaluation by dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996;20:9-14.
3. Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, Oestmann JW. MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Radiology 1998;207:675-681.
4. Esserman LJ, Kumar AS, Herrera AF, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging captures the biology of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:4603-4610.
5. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 2007;370:485-492.
6. Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Gieseke J, et al. Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency. Radiology 1997;203:137-144.
7. Weinreb JC, Newstead G. MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1995;196:593-610.
8. Jansen SA, Newstead GM, Abe H, Shimauchi A, Schmidt RA, Karczmar GS. Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: kinetic and morphologic MR characteristics compared with mammographic appearance and nuclear grade. Radiology 2007;245:684-691.
9. Harms SE. The use of breast magnetic resonance imaging in ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast J 2005;11:379-381.
10. Armitage P, Behrenbruch C, Brady M, Moore N. Extracting and visualizing physiological parameters using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Med Image Anal 2005;9:315-329.
11. Green JE, Shibata MA, Yoshidome K, et al. The C3(1)/SV40 T-antigen transgenic mouse model of mammary cancer: ductal epithelial cell targeting with multistage progression to carcinoma. Oncogene 2000;19:1020-1027.
12. Maroulakou IG, Anver M, Garrett L, Green JE. Prostate and mammary adenocarcinoma in transgenic mice carrying a rat C3(1) simian virus 40 large tumor antigen fusion gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1994;91:11236-11240.
13. Fan X, Markiewicz EJ, Zamora M, Karczmar GS, Roman BB. Comparison and evaluation of mouse cardiac MRI acquired with open birdcage, single loop surface and volume birdcage coils. Phys Med Biol 2006;51:N451-N459.
14. Jansen SA, Conzen SD, Fan X, et al. Detection of in situ mammary cancer in a transgenic mouse model: in vitro and in vivo MRI studies demonstrate histopathologic correlation. Phys Med Biol 2008;53:5481-5493.
15. Kovar DA, Lewis M, Karczmar GS. A new method for imaging perfusion and contrast extraction fraction: input functions derived from reference tissues. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998;8:1126-1134.
16. Vogt S. MAPS: a set of software tools for analysis and visualization of 3D x-ray fluorescence data sets. J Phys IV 2003;104:635-638.
17. De Stasio G, Casalbore P, Pallini R, et al. Gadolinium in human glioblastoma cells for gadolinium neutron capture therapy. Cancer Res 2001;61:4272-4277.
18. De Stasio G, Rajesh D, Casalbore P, et al. Are gadolinium contrast agents suitable for gadolinium neutron capture therapy? Neurol Res 2005;27:387-398.
19. Sieber MA, Lengsfeld P, Frenzel T, et al. Preclinical investigation to compare different gadolinium-based contrast agents regarding their propensity to release gadolinium in vivo and to trigger nephrogenic systemic fibrosislike lesions. Eur Radiol 2008;18:2164-2173.
20. Paunesku T, Ke T, Dharmakumar R, et al. Gadolinium-conjugated TiO2-DNA oligonucleotide nanoconjugates show prolonged intracellular retention period and T1-weighted contrast enhancement in magnetic resonance images. Nanomedicine 2008;4:201-207.
21. Endres PJ, Paunesku T, Vogt S, Meade TJ, Woloschak GE. DNA-TiO2 nanoconjugates labeled with magnetic resonance contrast agents. J Am Chem Soc 2007;129:15760-15761.
22. Weidensteiner C, Rausch M, McSheehy PM, Allegrini PR. Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in tumor-bearing rats and mice with inversion recovery TrueFISP and two contrast agents at 4.7 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:646-656.
23. Yankeelov TE, DeBusk LM, Billheimer DD, et al. Repeatability of a reference region model for analysis of murine DCE-MRI data at 7T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:1140-1147.
24. Furman-Haran E, Schechtman E, Kelcz F, Kirshenbaum K, Degani H. Magnetic resonance imaging reveals functional diversity of the vasculature in benign and malignant breast lesions. Cancer 2005;104:708-718.
25. Neubauer H, Li M, Kuehne-Heid R, Schneider A, Kaiser WA. High grade and non-high grade ductal carcinoma in situ on dynamic MR mammography: characteristic findings for signal increase and morphological pattern of enhancement. Br J Radiol 2003;76:3-12.
26. Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Brogi E, Liberman L. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2005;11:382-390.
27. Van Goethem M, Schelfout K, Kersschot E, et al. Comparison of MRI features of different grades of DCIS and invasive carcinoma of the breast. JBR-BTR 2005;88:225-232.
28. Orel SG, Mendonca MH, Reynolds C, Schnall MD, Solin LJ, Sullivan DC. MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology 1997;202:413-420.
29. Groves AM, Warren RM, Godward S, Rajan PS. Characterization of pure high-grade DCIS on magnetic resonance imaging using the evolving breast MR lexicon terminology: can it be differentiated from pure invasive disease? Magn Reson Imaging 2005;23:733-738.
30. Huang W, Li X, Morris EA, et al. The magnetic resonance shutter speed discriminates vascular properties of malignant and benign breast tumors in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:17943-17948.
31. Zierold K. Comparison of cryopreparation techniques for electron probe microanalysis of cells as exemplified by human erythrocytes. Scanning Microsc 1992;6:1137-1143.
32. Ralle M, Lutsenko S. Quantitative imaging of metals in tissues. Biometals 2009;22:197-205.