Literature DB >> 19668002

Analysis of prostate DCE-MRI: comparison of fast exchange limit and fast exchange regimen pharmacokinetic models in the discrimination of malignant from normal tissue.

Martin Lowry1, Bashar Zelhof, Gary P Liney, Peter Gibbs, Martin D Pickles, Lindsay W Turnbull.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The ability to detect and identify malignant lesions within the prostate with conventional T2-weighted imaging is still limited. Although lesion conspicuity is improved with dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging there still remains some ambiguity as all tissues within the prostate may enhance. The aim of the current study was to take advantage of the improved signal-to-noise ratio at 3 T and assess the ability of 2 alternative pharmacokinetic models to clearly identify malignant areas within the prostate. We also aspire to assess the impact of tissue heterogeneity on variation in estimated pharmacokinetic parameters.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) of the prostate was implemented using multiple flip angles for T1 determination, and a rapid dynamic 3D T1-weighted acquisition with parallel imaging and a temporal resolution of 6.7 s. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed for regions of tumor, normal-appearing peripheral zone (PZ), and central gland (CG) using fast exchange limit (FXL) or fast exchange regimen (FXR) models. Cell density was obtained from hematoxylin and eosin stained whole mount radical prostatectomy specimens.
RESULTS: Native tissue T1 was significantly lower in tumor and PZ tissue than in CG. The FXL model revealed increased mean K(trans), k(ep), and v(e) in tumor and CG compared with PZ. With the FXR model, fitting was improved and all parameters were significantly increased, however, there were no longer significant differences between regions for v(e). The additional parameter of the FXR model, tau(i), nominally representing mean lifetime of intracellular water, was significantly decreased in tumor compared with both PZ and CG. Rate constants for CG were significantly lower than those of tumor for both models. In addition, for all tissues, K(trans) and v(e) were positively correlated with cell density.
CONCLUSIONS: Accounting for a finite water exchange rate between cells and their environment improves the discrimination of malignant from benign tissues within the prostate and may aid staging accuracy and ability to monitor response to treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19668002     DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181b4c1fe

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  11 in total

1.  Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI-Derived Intracellular Water Lifetime (τ i ): A Prognostic Marker for Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas.

Authors:  S Chawla; L A Loevner; S G Kim; W-T Hwang; S Wang; G Verma; S Mohan; V LiVolsi; H Quon; H Poptani
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Estimation of cellular-interstitial water exchange in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI using two flip angles.

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Sungheon Gene Kim
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 4.044

3.  Statistical comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI pharmacokinetic models in human breast cancer.

Authors:  Xia Li; E Brian Welch; A Bapsi Chakravarthy; Lei Xu; Lori R Arlinghaus; Jaime Farley; Ingrid A Mayer; Mark C Kelley; Ingrid M Meszoely; Julie Means-Powell; Vandana G Abramson; Ana M Grau; John C Gore; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 4.668

4.  Feasibility of shutter-speed DCE-MRI for improved prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Xin Li; Ryan A Priest; William J Woodward; Ian J Tagge; Faisal Siddiqui; Wei Huang; William D Rooney; Tomasz M Beer; Mark G Garzotto; Charles S Springer
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 5.  Parallel MR imaging.

Authors:  Anagha Deshmane; Vikas Gulani; Mark A Griswold; Nicole Seiberlich
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Normal central zone of the prostate and central zone involvement by prostate cancer: clinical and MR imaging implications.

Authors:  Hebert Alberto Vargas; Oguz Akin; Tobias Franiel; Debra A Goldman; Kazuma Udo; Karim A Touijer; Victor E Reuter; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Current and future trends in magnetic resonance imaging assessments of the response of breast tumors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Lori R Arlinghaus; Xia Li; Mia Levy; David Smith; E Brian Welch; John C Gore; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 4.375

8.  Cell membrane water exchange effects in prostate DCE-MRI.

Authors:  Xin Li; Ryan A Priest; William J Woodward; Faisal Siddiqui; Tomasz M Beer; Mark G Garzotto; William D Rooney; Charles S Springer
Journal:  J Magn Reson       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 2.229

9.  Measurement of cellular-interstitial water exchange time in tumors based on diffusion-time-dependent diffusional kurtosis imaging.

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Gregory Lemberskiy; Linda Moy; Els Fieremans; Dmitry S Novikov; Sungheon Gene Kim
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 4.044

10.  Patient-specific pharmacokinetic parameter estimation on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate: Preliminary evaluation of a novel AIF-free estimation method.

Authors:  Shoshana B Ginsburg; Pekka Taimen; Harri Merisaari; Paula Vainio; Peter J Boström; Hannu J Aronen; Ivan Jambor; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 5.119

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.