Chen Yang1, Dong-Hoon Lee2, Antonella Mangraviti3, Lin Su4, Kai Zhang2, Yin Zhang4, Bin Zhang4, Wenxiao Li2, Betty Tyler3, John Wong4, Ken Kang-Hsin Wang4, Esteban Velarde4, Jinyuan Zhou2, Kai Ding4. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310022, China. 2. Division of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21287. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21287. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21231.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Radiotherapy remains a major treatment method for malignant tumors. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the standard modality for assessing glioma treatment response in the clinic. Compared to MRI, ultrasound imaging is low-cost and portable and can be used during intraoperative procedures. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively compare contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging and MRI of irradiated gliomas in rats and to determine which quantitative ultrasound imaging parameters can be used for the assessment of early response to radiation in glioma. METHODS: Thirteen nude rats with U87 glioma were used. A small thinned skull window preparation was performed to facilitate ultrasound imaging and mimic intraoperative procedures. Both CEUS and MRI with structural, functional, and molecular imaging parameters were performed at preradiation and at 1 day and 4 days postradiation. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the correlations between MRI and CEUS parameters and the changes between pre- and postradiation imaging. RESULTS: Area under the curve (AUC) in CEUS showed significant difference between preradiation and 4 days postradiation, along with four MRI parameters, T2, apparent diffusion coefficient, cerebral blood flow, and amide proton transfer-weighted (APTw) (all p < 0.05). The APTw signal was correlated with three CEUS parameters, rise time (r = - 0.527, p < 0.05), time to peak (r = - 0.501, p < 0.05), and perfusion index (r = 458, p < 0.05). Cerebral blood flow was correlated with rise time (r = - 0.589, p < 0.01) and time to peak (r = - 0.543, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: MRI can be used for the assessment of radiotherapy treatment response and CEUS with AUC as a new technique and can also be one of the assessment methods for early response to radiation in glioma.
PURPOSE: Radiotherapy remains a major treatment method for malignant tumors. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the standard modality for assessing glioma treatment response in the clinic. Compared to MRI, ultrasound imaging is low-cost and portable and can be used during intraoperative procedures. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively compare contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging and MRI of irradiated gliomas in rats and to determine which quantitative ultrasound imaging parameters can be used for the assessment of early response to radiation in glioma. METHODS: Thirteen nude rats with U87 glioma were used. A small thinned skull window preparation was performed to facilitate ultrasound imaging and mimic intraoperative procedures. Both CEUS and MRI with structural, functional, and molecular imaging parameters were performed at preradiation and at 1 day and 4 days postradiation. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the correlations between MRI and CEUS parameters and the changes between pre- and postradiation imaging. RESULTS: Area under the curve (AUC) in CEUS showed significant difference between preradiation and 4 days postradiation, along with four MRI parameters, T2, apparent diffusion coefficient, cerebral blood flow, and amide proton transfer-weighted (APTw) (all p < 0.05). The APTw signal was correlated with three CEUS parameters, rise time (r = - 0.527, p < 0.05), time to peak (r = - 0.501, p < 0.05), and perfusion index (r = 458, p < 0.05). Cerebral blood flow was correlated with rise time (r = - 0.589, p < 0.01) and time to peak (r = - 0.543, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: MRI can be used for the assessment of radiotherapy treatment response and CEUS with AUC as a new technique and can also be one of the assessment methods for early response to radiation in glioma.
Authors: Abhishek Rege; Alan C Seifert; Dan Schlattman; Yu Ouyang; Khan W Li; Luca Basaldella; Henry Brem; Betty M Tyler; Nitish V Thakor Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.170
Authors: Stijn C H van den Oord; Gerrit L ten Kate; Eric J G Sijbrands; Antonius F W van der Steen; Arend F L Schinkel Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2012-12-22 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: John Wong; Elwood Armour; Peter Kazanzides; Iulian Iordachita; Erik Tryggestad; Hua Deng; Mohammad Matinfar; Christopher Kennedy; Zejian Liu; Timothy Chan; Owen Gray; Frank Verhaegen; Todd McNutt; Eric Ford; Theodore L DeWeese Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Grazia Menna; Pier Paolo Mattogno; Carlo Maria Donzelli; Lucia Lisi; Alessandro Olivi; Giuseppe Maria Della Pepa Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2022-05-31
Authors: Tianlong Ji; Ziwei Feng; Edward Sun; Sook Kien Ng; Lin Su; Yin Zhang; Dong Han; Sarah Han-Oh; Iulian Iordachita; Junghoon Lee; Peter Kazanzides; Muyinatu A Lediju Bell; John Wong; Kai Ding Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-09-27 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Lin Su; Iulian Iordachita; Yin Zhang; Junghoon Lee; Sook Kien Ng; Juan Jackson; Ted Hooker; John Wong; Joseph M Herman; H Tutkun Sen; Peter Kazanzides; Muyinatu A Lediju Bell; Chen Yang; Kai Ding Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2017-06-02 Impact factor: 2.102