Hye-Young Heo1, Yi Zhang1, Dong-Hoon Lee1, Xiaohua Hong1, Jinyuan Zhou1,2. 1. Divison of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE) contributions to in vivo chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI signals in tumors. THEORY AND METHODS: Two-pool (free water and semi-solid protons) and four-pool (free water, semi-solid, amide, and upfield NOE-related protons) tissue models combined with the super-Lorentzian lineshape for semi-solid protons were used to fit wide and narrow frequency-offset magnetization-transfer (MT) data, respectively. Extrapolated semi-solid MT signals at 3.5 and -3.5 ppm from water were used as reference signals to quantify APT and NOE, respectively. Six glioma-bearing rats were scanned at 4.7 Tesla. Quantitative APT and NOE signals were compared at three saturation power levels. RESULTS: The observed APT signals were significantly higher in the tumor (center and rim) than in the contralateral normal brain tissue at all saturation powers, and were the major contributor to the APT-weighted image contrast (based on MT asymmetry analysis) between the tumor and the normal brain tissue. The NOE (a positive confounding factor) enhanced this APT-weighted image contrast. The fitted amide pool sizes were significantly larger, while the NOE-related pool sizes were significantly smaller in the tumor than in the normal brain tissue. CONCLUSION: The extrapolated semi-solid magnetization transfer reference provides a relatively accurate approach for quantitatively measuring pure APT and NOE signals.
PURPOSE: To quantify amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE) contributions to in vivo chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI signals in tumors. THEORY AND METHODS: Two-pool (free water and semi-solid protons) and four-pool (free water, semi-solid, amide, and upfield NOE-related protons) tissue models combined with the super-Lorentzian lineshape for semi-solid protons were used to fit wide and narrow frequency-offset magnetization-transfer (MT) data, respectively. Extrapolated semi-solid MT signals at 3.5 and -3.5 ppm from water were used as reference signals to quantify APT and NOE, respectively. Six glioma-bearing rats were scanned at 4.7 Tesla. Quantitative APT and NOE signals were compared at three saturation power levels. RESULTS: The observed APT signals were significantly higher in the tumor (center and rim) than in the contralateral normal brain tissue at all saturation powers, and were the major contributor to the APT-weighted image contrast (based on MT asymmetry analysis) between the tumor and the normal brain tissue. The NOE (a positive confounding factor) enhanced this APT-weighted image contrast. The fitted amide pool sizes were significantly larger, while the NOE-related pool sizes were significantly smaller in the tumor than in the normal brain tissue. CONCLUSION: The extrapolated semi-solid magnetization transfer reference provides a relatively accurate approach for quantitatively measuring pure APT and NOE signals.
Authors: Craig K Jones; Daniel Polders; Jun Hua; He Zhu; Hans J Hoogduin; Jinyuan Zhou; Peter Luijten; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kannie W Y Chan; Michael T McMahon; Yoshinori Kato; Guanshu Liu; Jeff W M Bulte; Zaver M Bhujwalla; Dmitri Artemov; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-10-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Craig K Jones; Alan Huang; Jiadi Xu; Richard A E Edden; Michael Schär; Jun Hua; Nikita Oskolkov; Domenico Zacà; Jinyuan Zhou; Michael T McMahon; Jay J Pillai; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Hye-Young Heo; Yi Zhang; Tina M Burton; Shanshan Jiang; Yansong Zhao; Peter C M van Zijl; Richard Leigh; Jinyuan Zhou Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Meiyun Wang; Xiaohua Hong; Che-Feng Chang; Qiang Li; Bo Ma; Hong Zhang; Sinan Xiang; Hye-Young Heo; Yi Zhang; Dong-Hoon Lee; Shanshan Jiang; Richard Leigh; Raymond C Koehler; Peter C M van Zijl; Jian Wang; Jinyuan Zhou Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Shanshan Jiang; Tianyu Zou; Charles G Eberhart; Maria A V Villalobos; Hye-Young Heo; Yi Zhang; Yu Wang; Xianlong Wang; Hao Yu; Yongxing Du; Peter C M van Zijl; Zhibo Wen; Jinyuan Zhou Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-07-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Zhengwei Zhou; Pei Han; Bill Zhou; Anthony G Christodoulou; Jaime L Shaw; Zixin Deng; Debiao Li Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-05-30 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Xiao-Yong Zhang; Feng Wang; Hua Li; Junzhong Xu; Daniel F Gochberg; John C Gore; Zhongliang Zu Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 4.044