Literature DB >> 17006886

Prediction of chemotherapeutic response of colorectal liver metastases with dynamic gadolinium-DTPA-enhanced MRI and localized 19F MRS pharmacokinetic studies of 5-fluorouracil.

H W M van Laarhoven1, D W J Klomp, M Rijpkema, Y L M Kamm, D J Th Wagener, J O Barentsz, C J A Punt, A Heerschap.   

Abstract

Systemic chemotherapy is effective in only a subset of patients with metastasized colorectal cancer. Therefore, early selection of patients who are most likely to benefit from chemotherapy is desirable. Response to treatment may be determined by the delivery of the drug to the tumor, retention of the drug in the tumor and by the amount of intracellular uptake, metabolic activation and catabolism, as well as other factors. The first aim of this study was to investigate the predictive value of DCE-MRI with the contrast agent Gd-DTPA for tumor response to first-line chemotherapy in patients with liver metastases of colorectal cancer. The second aim was to investigate the predictive value of 5-fluorouracil (FU) uptake, retention and catabolism as measured by localized (19)F MRS for tumor response to FU therapy. Since FU uptake, retention and metabolism may depend on tumor vascularization, the relationship between (19)F MRS and the DCE-MRI parameters k(ep), K(trans) and v(e) was also examined (1). In this study, 37 patients were included. The kinetic parameters of DCE-MRI, k(ep), K(trans) and v(e), before start of treatment did not predict tumor response after 2 months, suggesting that the delivery of chemotherapy by tumor vasculature is not a major factor determining response in first-line treatment. No evident correlations between (19)F MRS parameters and tumor response were found. This suggests that in liver metastases that are not selected on the basis of their tumor diameter, FU uptake and catabolism are not limiting factors for response. The transfer constant K(trans), as measured by DCE-MRI before start of treatment, was negatively correlated with FU half-life in the liver metastases, which suggests that, in metastases with a larger tumor blood flow or permeability surface area product, FU is rapidly washed out from the tumor. c 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17006886     DOI: 10.1002/nbm.1098

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


  18 in total

1.  Prediction of response to chemoradiation therapy in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  S Kim; L A Loevner; H Quon; A Kilger; E Sherman; G Weinstein; A Chalian; H Poptani
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  An exploratory pilot study into the association between microcirculatory parameters derived by MRI-based pharmacokinetic analysis and glucose utilization estimated by PET-CT imaging in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Sotirios Bisdas; Oliver Seitz; Markus Middendorp; Nicole Chambron-Pinho; Theodosios Bisdas; Thomas J Vogl; Renate Hammerstingl; Ulrike Ernemann; Martin G Mack
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Molecular and functional imaging of invasion and metastasis: windows into the metastatic cascade.

Authors:  Ioannis Stasinopoulos; Marie-France Penet; Balaji Krishnamachary; Zaver M Bhujwalla
Journal:  Cancer Biomark       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.388

Review 4.  Imaging ovarian cancer and peritoneal metastases--current and emerging techniques.

Authors:  Stavroula Kyriazi; Stan B Kaye; Nandita M deSouza
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 5.  Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in metabolic and molecular imaging and diagnosis of cancer.

Authors:  Kristine Glunde; Dmitri Artemov; Marie-France Penet; Michael A Jacobs; Zaver M Bhujwalla
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 60.622

6.  Uncertainty in MR tracer kinetic parameters and water exchange rates estimated from T1-weighted dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Sungheon Kim
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 7.  Metabolic tumor imaging using magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Authors:  Kristine Glunde; Zaver M Bhujwalla
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 8.  Opportunities and pitfalls of cancer imaging in clinical trials.

Authors:  Bruno Morgan
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 66.675

9.  Estimation of Contrast Agent Concentration in DCE-MRI Using 2 Flip Angles.

Authors:  Ayesha Bharadwaj Das; James Andrew Tranos; Jin Zhang; Youssef Zaim Wadghiri; Sungheon Gene Kim
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2022-05-01       Impact factor: 6.016

10.  Parametric exploration of the liver by magnetic resonance methods.

Authors:  Paul E Sijens
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-06-06       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.