Study of onset time-shift and injection duration in DCE-MRI: A comparison of a reference region model with the general kinetic model

NMR in Biomedicine

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 375-381

  Hsiao, Ing Tsung ^a,b   Liao, Yen Peng ^a   Liu, Ho Ling ^a,b  

^a CHANG GUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b CHANG GUNG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

AIF; DCE MRI; Reference region model; Temporal resolution

Indexed keywords

AIF; ARTERIAL INPUT FUNCTION; COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION; DCE-MRI; DYNAMIC CONTRAST; INJECTION DURATIONS; KINETIC MODELS; MEAN ERRORS; ONSET-TIME; PHYSIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; SAMPLING INTERVAL; TEMPORAL RESOLUTION;

COMPOSITE MICROMECHANICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; KINETIC THEORY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARAMETER ESTIMATION;

PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS;

ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTERIAL INPUT FUNCTION; ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISPERSION; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GENERAL KINETIC MODEL; HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS; KINETICS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFERENCE REGION MODEL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; REFERENCE STANDARDS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 77951589040     PISSN: 09523480     EISSN: 10991492     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/nbm.1473     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Barrett T, Brechbiel M, Bernardo M, Choyke PL. MRI of tumor angiogenesis. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007; 26(2): 235-249.
2. Choyke PL, Dwyer AJ, Knopp MV. Functional tumor imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2003; 17(5): 509-520.
3. Padhani AR. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical oncology: current status and future directions. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2002; 16(4): 407-422.
4. Benjaminsen IC, Brurberg KG, Ruud EB, Rofstad EK. Assessment of extravascular extracellular space fraction in human melanoma xenografts by DCE-MRI and kinetic modeling. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2008; 26(2): 160-170.
5. Benjaminsen IC, Graff BA, Brurberg KG, Rofstad EK. Assessment of tumor blood perfusion by high-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a preclinical study of human melanoma xenografts. Magn. Reson. Med. 2004; 52(2): 269-276.
6. Egeland TA, Gaustad JV, Vestvik IK, Benjaminsen IC, Mathiesen B, Rofstad EK. Assessment of fraction of radiobiologically hypoxic cells in human melanoma xenografts by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 2006; 55(4): 874-882.
7. Vestvik IK, Egeland TA, Gaustad JV, Mathiesen B, Rofstad EK. Assessment of microvascular density, extracellular volume fraction, and radiobiological hypoxia in human melanoma xenografts by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007; 26(4): 1033-1042.
8. Lopata RG, van Riel NA. Identifiability analysis of the standard pharmacokinetic models in DCE MR imaging of tumours. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med. Biol. Soc. 2004; 2: 1040-1043.
9. Buckley DL. Uncertainty in the analysis of tracer kinetics using dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 2002; 47(3): 601-606.
10. Simpson NE, He Z, Evelhoch JL. Deuterium NMR tissue perfusion measurements using the tracer uptake approach: I. Optimization of methods. Magn. Reson. Med. 1999; 42(1): 42-52.
11. Yankeelov TE, Cron GO, Addison CL, Wallace JC, Wilkins RC, Pappas BA, Santyr GE, Gore JC. Comparison of a reference region model with direct measurement of an AIF in the analysis of DCE-MRI data. Magn. Reson. Med. 2007; 57(2): 353-361.
12. Henderson E, Rutt BK, Lee TY. Temporal sampling requirements for the tracer kinetics modeling of breast disease. Magn. Reson. Imaging 1998; 16(9): 1057-1073.
13. Weinmann HJ, Laniado M, Mutzel W. Pharmacokinetics of GdDTPA/dimeglumine after intravenous injection into healthy volunteers. Physiologic. Chem. Physic. Medic. NMR. 1984; 16(2): 167-172.
14. Workie DW, Dardzinski BJ. Quantifying dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the knee in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis using an arterial input function (AIF) extracted from popliteal artery enhancement, and the effect of the choice of the AIF on the kinetic parameters. Magn. Reson. Med. 2005; 54(3): 560-568.
15. Cheng HL. T1 measurement of flowing blood and arterial input function determination for quantitative 3D T1-weighted DCE-MRI. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007; 25(5): 1073-1078.
16. Wang Y, Huang W, Panicek DM, Schwartz LH, Koutcher JA. Feasibility of using limited-population-based arterial input function for pharmacokinetic modeling of osteosarcoma dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data. Magn. Reson. Med. 2008; 59(5): 1183-1189.
17. Evelhoch JL. Key factors in the acquisition of contrast kinetic data for oncology. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 1999; 10(3): 254-259.
18. 11C] Raclopride studies. J. Cereb. Blood. Flow. Metab 1996; 16: 42-52.
19. 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.
20. Yankeelov TE, Luci JJ, Lepage M, Li R, Debusk L, Lin PC, Price RR, Gore JC. Quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis of DCE-MRI data without an arterial input function: a reference region model. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2005; 23(4): 519-529.
21. Yankeelov TE, DeBusk LM, Billheimer DD, Luci JJ, Lin PC, Price RR, Gore JC. Repeatability of a reference region model for analysis of murine DCE-MRI data at7T. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2006; 24(5): 1140-1147.
22. Yang C, Karczmar GS, Medved M, Stadler WM. Estimating the arterial input function using two reference tissues in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI studies: fundamental concepts and simulations. Magn. Reson. Med. 2004; 52(5): 1110-1117.
23. Yang C, Karczmar GS, Medved M, Stadler WM. Multiple reference tissue method for contrast agent arterial input function estimation. Magn. Reson. Med. 2007; 58(6): 1266-1275.
24. Stanisz GJ, Odrobina EE, Pun J, Escaravage M, Graham SJ, Bronskill MJ, Henkelman RM. T1, T2 relaxation and magnetization transfer in tissue at3T. Magn. Reson. Med. 2005; 54(3): 507-512.
25. Eliat PA, Dedieu V, Bertino C, Boute V, Lacroix J, Constans JM, de Korvin B, Vincent C, Bailly C, Joffre F, de Certaines J, Vincensini D. Magnetic resonance imaging contrast-enhanced relaxometry of breast tumors: an MRI multicenter investigation concerning 100 patients. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004; 22(4): 475-481.
26. Silvennoinen MJ, Clingman CS, Golay X, Kauppinen RA, van Zijl PC. Comparison of the dependence of blood R2 and R2* on oxygen saturation at 1.5 and 4.7 Tesla. Magn. Reson. Med. 2003; 49(1): 47-60.
27. Meyer RA, Towse TF, Reid RW, Jayaraman RC, Wiseman RW, McCully KK. BOLD MRI mapping of transient hyperemia in skeletal muscle after single contractions. NMR Biomed 2004; 17(6): 392-398.
28. Lankester KJ, Taylor JN, Stirling JJ, Boxall J, d'Arcy JA, Collins DJ, Walker-Samuel S, Leach MO, Rustin GJ, Padhani AR. Dynamic MRI for imaging tumor microvasculature: comparison of susceptibility and relaxivity techniques in pelvic tumors. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2007; 25(4): 796-805.
29. Tofts PS, Berkowitz B, Schnall MD. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn. Reson. Med. 1995; 33(4): 564-568.
30. Faranesh AZ, Yankeelov TE. Incorporating a vascular term into a reference region model for the analysis of DCE-MRI data: a simulation study. Physic. Med. Biol. 2008; 53(10): 2617-2631.
31. Calamante F, Gadian DG, Connelly A. Delay and dispersion effects in dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI: simulations using singular value decomposition. Magn. Reson. Med. 2000; 44(3): 466-473.