Literature DB >> 11870909

Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in human muscle and tumours: comparison of quantitative and semi-quantitative analysis.

Susan M Galbraith1, Martin A Lodge, N Jane Taylor, Gordon J S Rustin, Søren Bentzen, J James Stirling, Anwar R Padhani.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI and compare quantitative kinetic parameters with semi-quantitative methods, and whole region-of-interest (ROI) with pixel analysis. Twenty-one patients with a range of tumour types underwent paired MRI examinations within a week, of which 16 pairs were evaluable. A proton density-weighted image was obtained prior to a dynamic series of 30 T(1)-weighted spoiled gradient echo images every 11.9 s with an intravenous bolus of gadopentetate dimeglumine given after the third baseline data point. Identical ROIs around the whole tumour and in skeletal muscle were drawn by the same observer on each pair of examinations and used for the reproducibility analysis. Semi-quantitative parameters, gradient, enhancement and AUC (area under the curve) were derived from tissue enhancement curves. Quantitative parameters (K(trans), k(ep), v(e)) were obtained by the application of the Tofts' model. Analysis was performed on data averaged across the whole ROI and on the median value from individual pixels within the ROI. No parameter showed a significant change between examinations. For all parameters except K(trans), the variability was not dependent on the parameter value, so the absolute values for the size of changes needed for significance should be used for future reference rather than percentages. The size of change needed for significance in a group of 16 in tumours for K(trans), k(ep) and v(e) was -14 to +16%, -0.20 ml/ml/min (15%) and -1.9[?]ml/ml (6%), respectively (pixel analysis), and -16 to +19%, -0.23 ml/ml/min (16%) and +/- 1.9[?]ml/ml (6%) (whole ROI analysis). For a single tumour, changes greater than -45 to +83%, +/- 0.78 ml/ml/min (60%) and +/- 7.6 ml/ml (24%), respectively, would be significant (pixel analysis). For gradient, enhancement and AUC the size of change needed for significance in tumours was -0.24 (17%), -0.05 (6%) and -0.06 (8%), respectively for a group of 16 (pixel analysis), and +/- 0.96 (68%), +/- 0.20 (25%) and +/- 0.22 (32%) for individuals. In muscle, the size of change needed for significance in a group of 16 for K(trans), k(ep) and v(e) was -30 to +44%, +/- 0.81 ml/ml/min (61%) and +/- 1.7 ml/ml (13%). For gradient, enhancement and AUC it was +/- 0.09 (20%), +/- 0.02 (8%) and +/- 0.03 (12%). v(e), enhancement and AUC are highly reproducible DCE-MRI parameters. K(trans), k(ep) and gradient have greater variability, with larger changes in individuals required to be statistically significant, but are nevertheless sufficiently reproducible to detect changes greater than 14-17% in a cohort of 16 patients. Pixel analyses slightly improve reproducibility estimates and retain information about spatial heterogeneity. Reproducibility studies are recommended when treatment effects are being monitored. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11870909     DOI: 10.1002/nbm.731

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  NMR Biomed        ISSN: 0952-3480            Impact factor:   4.044


  101 in total

Review 1.  Clinical implications of skeletal muscle blood-oxygenation-level-dependent (BOLD) MRI.

Authors:  Sasan Partovi; Sasan Karimi; Bjoern Jacobi; Anja-Carina Schulte; Markus Aschwanden; Lisa Zipp; John K Lyo; Christof Karmonik; Matthias Müller-Eschner; Rolf W Huegli; Georg Bongartz; Deniz Bilecen
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2012-02-29       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 2.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical trials of antivascular therapies.

Authors:  James P B O'Connor; Alan Jackson; Geoff J M Parker; Caleb Roberts; Gordon C Jayson
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 3.  Multicentre imaging measurements for oncology and in the brain.

Authors:  P S Tofts; D J Collins
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging techniques: CT and MRI.

Authors:  J P B O'Connor; P S Tofts; K A Miles; L M Parkes; G Thompson; A Jackson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 5.  Diffusion-weighted (DW) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for monitoring anticancer therapy.

Authors:  Anwar R Padhani; Aftab Alam Khan
Journal:  Target Oncol       Date:  2010-04-11       Impact factor: 4.493

6.  Reproducibility of static and dynamic (18)F-FDG, (18)F-FLT, and (18)F-FMISO MicroPET studies in a murine model of HER2+ breast cancer.

Authors:  Jennifer G Whisenant; Todd E Peterson; Jacob U Fluckiger; Mohammed Noor Tantawy; Gregory D Ayers; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.488

7.  Repeatability of regional pulmonary functional metrics of Hyperpolarized 129 Xe dissolved-phase MRI.

Authors:  Andrew D Hahn; Jeff Kammerman; Michael Evans; Wei Zha; Robert V Cadman; Keith Meyer; Nathan Sandbo; Sean B Fain
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  Monitoring chemotherapeutic response by hyperpolarized 13C-fumarate MRS and diffusion MRI.

Authors:  Lionel Mignion; Prasanta Dutta; Gary V Martinez; Parastou Foroutan; Robert J Gillies; Bénédicte F Jordan
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 12.701

9.  Validation of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging-derived vascular permeability measurements using quantitative autoradiography in the RG2 rat brain tumor model.

Authors:  Moira C Ferrier; Hemant Sarin; Steve H Fung; Bawarjan Schatlo; Ryszard M Pluta; Sandeep N Gupta; Peter L Choyke; Edward H Oldfield; David Thomasson; John A Butman
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.715

10.  Assessing reproducibility of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging studies in a murine model of HER2+ breast cancer.

Authors:  Jennifer G Whisenant; Gregory D Ayers; Mary E Loveless; Stephanie L Barnes; Daniel C Colvin; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-12-14       Impact factor: 2.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.