T2-relaxivity contrast imaging: First results

Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

Volumn 69, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1430-1437

  Sourbron, Steven ^a,b   Heilmann, Melanie ^c,d,e   Walczak, Christine ^d,e   Vautier, Julien ^d,e,f   Schad, Lothar R ^c   Volk, Andreas ^d,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^d INSTITUT CURIE   (France)

^e INSERM   (France)

^f UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

Author keywords

cellular geometry; contrast agent; DCE MRI; susceptibility; tumor; vessel geometry

Indexed keywords

CYTOLOGY; MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; MAMMALS; TUMORS;

COLORECTAL TUMORS; CONTRAST AGENT; CONTRAST IMAGING; DCE-MRI; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED MRI; SIMULATION STUDIES; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION; VESSEL GEOMETRY;

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CELL MEMBRANE; COLORECTAL TUMOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERSTITIAL VOLUME; MEDICAL PARAMETERS; MOUSE; NOISE; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PLASMA VOLUME; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; T2 RELAXIVITY CONTRAST IMAGING; THEORY; TUMOR XENOGRAFT; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; METABOLISM; METHODOLOGY; NUDE MOUSE; PILOT STUDY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR CELL LINE;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; GADOMELITOL; HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUND; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; CELL LINE, TUMOR; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTRAST MEDIA; HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUNDS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MICE; MICE, NUDE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; PILOT PROJECTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84876471760     PISSN: 07403194     EISSN: 15222594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.24383     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Knopp M, Giesel F, Marcos H, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Choyke P,. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in oncology. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 12: 301-308.
2. Padhani AR, Leach MO,. Antivascular cancer treatments: functional assessments by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging 2005; 30: 324-341.
3. Zahra MA, Hollingsworth KG, Sala E, Lomas DJ, Tan LT,. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a predictor of tumour response to radiotherapy. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8: 63-74.
4. Stephen RM, Gillies RJ,. Promise and progress for functional and molecular imaging of response to targeted therapies. Pharm Res 2007; 24: 1172-1185.
5. Kiessling F, Morgenstern B, Zhang C,. Contrast agents and applications to assess tumor angiogenesis in vivo by magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Med Chem 2007; 14: 77-91.
6. Marcus CD, Ladam-Marcus V, Cucu C, Bouché O, Lucas L, Hoeffel C,. Imaging techniques to evaluate the response to treatment in oncology: current standards and perspectives. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2009; 72: 217-238.
7. Lammers T, Subr V, Peschke P, Kühnlein R, Hennink WE, Ulbrich K, Kiessling F, Heilmann M, Debus J, Huber PE, Storm G,. Image-guided and passively tumor-targeted polymeric nanomedicines for radiochemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2008; 99: 900-910.
8. Ostergaard L,. Principles of cerebral perfusion imaging by bolus tracking. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 22: 710-717.
9. Dennie J, Mandeville JB, Boxerman JL, Packard SD, Rosen BR, Weisskoff RM,. NMR Imaging of changes in vascular morphology due to tumor angiogenesis. Magn Reson Med 1998; 40: 793-799.
10. Troprès I, Lamalle L, Farion R, Segebarth C, Rémy C,. Vessel size imaging using low intravascular contrast agent concentrations. Magn Reson Mater Phys 2004; 17: 313-316.
11. Kiselev VG, Strecker R, Ziyeh S, Speck O, Hennig J,. Vessel size imaging in humans. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53: 553-563.
12. Heilmann M, Walczak C, Vautier J, Dimicoli JL, Thomas CD, Lupu M, Mispelter J, Volk A,. Simultaneous dynamic T1 and T2* measurement for AIF assessment combined with DCE MRI in a mouse tumor model. Magn Reson Mater Phys 2007; 20: 193-203.
13. de Bazelaire C, Rofsky NM, Duhamel G, Zhang J, Michaelson MD, George D, Alsop DC,. Combined T2* and T1 measurements for improved perfusion and permeability studies in high field using dynamic contrast enhancement. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 2083-2091.
14. Sourbron S, Heilmann M, Biffar A, Walczak C, Vautier J, Volk A, Peller M,. Bolus-tracking MRI with a simultaneous T1- and T2-measurement. Magn Reson Med 2009; 62: 672-681.
15. Lüdemann L, Prochnow D, Rohlfing T, Franiel T, Warmuth C, Taupitz M, Rehbein H, Beyersdorff D,. Simultaneous quantification of perfusion and permeability in the prostate using dynamic contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging with an inversion-prepared dual-contrast sequence. Ann Biomed Eng 2009; 37: 749-762.
16. Kuperman VY, Karczmar GS, Blomley MJK, Lewis MZ, Lubich LM, Lipton MJ,. Differentiating between T1 and T2* changes caused by gadopentetate dimeglumine in the kidney by using a double echo dynamic MR imaging sequence. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6: 764-768.
17. Uematsu H, Maeda M, Sadato N, Matsuda T, Ishimori Y, Koshimoto Y, Yamada H, Kimura H, Kawamura Y, Matsuda T, Hayashi N, Yonekura Y, Ishii Y,. Vascular permeability: quantitative measurement with double echo dynamic MR imaging-theory and clinical application. Radiology 2000; 214: 912-917.
18. Quarles CC, Gochberg DF, Gore JC, Yankeelov TE,. A theoretical framework to model DSC-MRI data acquired in the presence of contrast agent extravasation. Phys Med Biol 2009; 54: 5749-5766.
19. 2-dominant extravasation correction in DSC-MRI: Part I-theoretical considerations and implications for assessment of tumor hemodynamic properties. J Cereb Blood Flow Metabol 2011; 31: 2041-2053.
20. Donaldson SB, Buckley DL, O'Connor JP, Davidson SE, Carrington BM, Jones AP, West CML,. Enhancing fraction measured using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI predicts disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Cancer 2010; 102: 23-26.
21. Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, Requardt M, Weinmann HJ,. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol. 2005; 40: 715-24.
22. Kjølby BF, Østergaard L, Kiselev VG,. Theoretical model of intravascular paramagnetic tracers effect on tissue relaxation. Magn Reson Med. 2006; 56: 187-197.
23. Parker GJ, Roberts C, Macdonald A, Buonaccorsi GA, Cheung S, Buckley DL, Jackson A, Watson Y, Davies K, Jayson GC,. Experimentally-derived functional form for a population-averaged high-temporal-resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2006; 56: 993-1000.
24. Vautier, J, Heilmann M, Walczak C, Mispeltier J and Volk A,. 2D and 3D Radial Multi-Gradient-Echo DCE MRI in Murine Tumor Models With Dynamic R2-Corrected R1 Mapping. Magn Reson Med 2010; 64: 313-318.
25. Sourbron SP, Buckley DL,. Tracer kinetic modelling in MRI: estimating perfusion and capillary permeability. Phys Med Biol 2012; 57: R1-R33
26. Ewing JR, Brown SL, Lu M, Panda S, Ding G, Knight RA, Cao Y, Jiang Q, Nagaraja TN, Churchman JL, Fenstermacher JD,. Model selection in magnetic resonance imaging measurements of vascular permeability: Gadomer in a 9L model of rat cerebral tumor. J Cereb Blood Flow Metabol 2006; 26: 310-320.
27. Kiselev VG,. On the theoretical basis of perfusion measurements by dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. Magn Reson Med 2001; 46: 1113-1122.
28. Kiselev VG,. Transverse relaxation effect of MRI contrast agents: a crucial issue for quantitative measurements of cerebral perfusion. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 22: 693-696.
29. 2* MRI. J Cereb Blood Flow Metabol 2006; 26: 760-770.
30. Yablonskiy DA, Haacke EM,. Theory of NMR signal behavior in magnetically inhomogeneous tissues: the static dephasing regime. Magn Reson Med 1994; 32: 749-763.
31. 2* increase or decrease when contrast agent extravasates? A simulation study. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Montreal, Canada, 2011. p. 3916.