Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of VX2 carcinoma in a rabbit model: Comparison of 1.0-M gadobutrol and 0.5-M gadopentetate dimeglumine

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 45, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 655-661

  Chang, Jung Min ^a   Moon, Woo Kyung ^a   Cha, Joo Hee ^b   Jung, Eun Jung ^a   Cho, Nariya ^a   Kim, Seung Ja ^c  

^a Seoul National University Hospital   (South Korea)

^b University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^c Seoul National University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

experimental study; extracellular contrast agent; gadobutrol; high molar; magnetic resonance (MR)

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOBUTROL; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING AGENT;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CARCINOMA; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RABBIT; RADIOLOGIST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 77957252364     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181ed55b4     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Reimer P, Tombach B. Hepatic MRI with SPIO: detection and characterization of focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol. 1998;8:1198-1204.
2. Ward J, Robinson PJ. How to detect hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:2258-2272.
3. Vogl TJ, Schwarz W, Blume S, et al. Preoperative evaluation of malignant liver tumors: comparison of unenhanced and SPIO (Resovist)-enhanced MR imaging with biphasic CTAP and intraoperative US. Eur Radiol. 2003;13: 262-272.
4. Knauth M, Forsting M, Hartmann M, et al. MR enhancement of brain lesions: increased contrast dose compared with magnetization transfer. Am J Neuro-radiol. 1996;17:1853-1859.
5. Yoshida H, Itai Y, Ohtomo K, et al. Small hepatocellular carcinoma and cavernous hemangioma: differentiation with dynamic FLASH MR imaging with Gd-DTPA. Radiology. 1989;171:339-342. (Pubitemid 19108096)
6. Ohtomo K, Itai Y, Yoshikawa K, et al. Hepatic tumors: dynamic MR imaging. Radiology. 1987;163:27-31.
7. Runge VM, Kirsch JE, Thomas GS. High-dose applications of gadolinium chelates in magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1991;22:358-363.
8. Runge VM, Pels Rijcken TH, Davidoff A, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the liver. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;4:281-289.
9. Tombach B, Heindel W. Value of 1.0-M gadolinium chelates: review of preclinical and clinical data on gadobutrol. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:1550-1556.
10. Goyen M, Lauenstein TC, Herborn CU, et al. 0.5 M Gd chelate (Magnevist) versus 1.0 M Gd chelate (Gadovist): dose-independent effect on image quality of pelvic three-dimensional MR-angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001; 14:602-607.
11. Herborn CU, Lauenstein TC, Ruehm SG, et al. Intraindividual comparison of gadopentetate dimeglumine, gadobenate dimeglumine, and gadobutrol for pelvic 3D magnetic resonance angiography. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:27-33.
12. Tombach B, Benner T, Reimer P, et al. Do highly concentrated gadolinium chelates improve MR brain perfusion imaging? Intraindividually controlled randomized crossover concentration comparison study of 0.5 versus 1.0 mol/L gadobutrol. Radiology. 2003;226:880-888.
13. Kawai J, Takahashi M, Kato N, et al. Comparison of a 1.0 molar and a 0.5 molar formulation of gadobutrol in dynamic MR imaging of the liver in rats with hepatocellular carcinoma. Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;17:91-97.
14. Kim YK, Lee YH, Kim CS, et al. Double-dose 1.0-M gadobutrol versus standard-dose 0.5-M gadopentetate dimeglumine in revealing small hyper-vascular hepatocellular carcinomas. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:70-77.
15. Hammerstingl R, Adam G, Ayuso JR, et al. Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in five hundred seventy-two patients with known or suspected liver lesions: results of a multicenter, double-blind, interindividual, randomized clinical phase-III trial. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:168-176.
16. Attenberger UI, Runge VM, Jackson CB, et al. Comparative evaluation of lesion enhancement using 1 M gadobutrol vs. 2 conventional gadolinium chelates, all at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg, in a rat brain tumor model at 3 T. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:251-256.
17. Dunne AA, Mandic R, Ramaswamy A, et al. Lymphogenic metastatic spread of auricular VX2 carcinoma in New Zealand white rabbits. Anticancer Res. 2002;22:3273-3279.
18. Knopp MV, Runge VM, Essig M, et al. Primary and secondary brain tumors at MR imaging: bicentric intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology. 2004;230:55-64.
19. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method comparing the areas under receiver operator characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983; 148:839-843.
20. Rao JN, Scott AJ. A simple method for the analysis of clustered binary data. Biometrics. 1992;48:577-585.
21. Vogler H, Platzek J, Schuhmann-Giampieri G, et al. Preclinical evaluation of gadobutrol: a new, neutral, extracellular contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol. 1995;21:1-10.
22. Staks T, Schuhmann-Giampieri G, Frenzel T, et al. Pharmacokinetics, dose proportionality, and tolerability of gadobutrol after single intravenous injection in healthy volunteers. Invest Radiol. 1994;29:709-715. (Pubitemid 24258267)
23. Voth M, Haneder S, Huck K, et al. Peripheral magnetic resonance angiogra-phy with continuous table movement in combination with high spatial and temporal resolution time-resolved MRA With a total single dose (0.1 mmol/kg) of gadobutrol at 3.0 T. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:627-633.
24. Tombach B, Bohndorf K, Brodtrager W, et al. Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadopentate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI in 471 patients with known or suspected renal lesions: results of a multicenter, single-blind, interindividual, randomized clinical phase III trial. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:2610-2619.
25. Moon WK, Chang KH, Weinmann HJ, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of bacterial abscess and VX2 carcinoma in rabbits: comparison of gadopentetate dimeglumine and a macromolecular contrast agent. Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:1385-1390.
26. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology. 1999;211:101-110.
27. Orel SG. Differentiating benign from malignant enhancing lesions identified at MR imaging of the breast: are time-signal intensity curves an accurate predictor? Radiology. 1999;211:5-7.
28. Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, et al. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:715-724.
29. Berg A, Singer T, Moser E. High-resolution diffusivity imaging at 3.0 T for the detection of degenerative changes: a trypsin-based arthritis model. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:460-466.
30. Krautmacher C, Willinek WA, Tschampa HJ, et al. Brain tumors: full-and half-dose contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 3. 0 T compared with 1.5 T-Initial Experience. Radiology. 2005;237:1014-1019.
31. Frenzel T, Lengsfeld P, Schirmer H, et al. Stability of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents in human serum at 37°C. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:817-828.
32. Pietsch H, Lengsfeld P, Steger-Hartmann T, et al. Impact of renal impairment on long-term retention of gadolinium in the rodent skin following the administration of gadolinium-based contrast agents. Invest Radiol. 2009;44: 226-233.
33. Haylor J, Dencausse A, Vickers M, et al. Nephrogenic gadolinium biodistri-bution and skin cellularity following a single injection of omniscan in the rat. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:507-512.
34. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Renal tolerance of a neutral gadolinium chelate (gadobutrol) in patients with chronic renal failure: results of a randomized study. Radiology. 2001;218:651-657.