Hongzan Sun1, Jun Xin2, Jinyuan Zhou3, Zaiming Lu1, Qiyong Guo1. 1. Department of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Sanhao Street No. 36, Heping District, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Sanhao Street No. 36, Heping District, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China. xinj_sjcmu@126.com. 3. Division of MR Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Park 336, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic concordance and metric correlations of amide proton transfer (APT) imaging with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 2-deoxy-2-[18F-]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), using hybrid brain PET/MRI. PROCEDURES: Twenty-one subjects underwent brain gadolinium-enhanced [18F]FDG PET/MRI prospectively. Imaging accuracy was compared between unenhanced MRI, MRI with enhancement, APT-weighted (APTW) images, and PET based on six diagnostic criteria. Among tumors, the McNemar test was further used for concordance assessment between gadolinium-enhanced imaging, APT imaging, and [18F]FDG PET. As well, the relation of metrics between APT imaging and PET was analyzed by the Pearson correlation analysis. RESULTS: APT imaging and gadolinium-enhanced MRI showed superior and similar diagnostic accuracy. APTW signal intensity and gadolinium enhancement were concordant in 19 tumors (100 %), while high [18F]FDG avidity was shown in only 12 (63.2 %). For the metrics from APT imaging and PET, there was significant correlation for 13 hypermetabolic tumors (P < 0.05) and no correlation for the remaining six [18F]FDG-avid tumors. CONCLUSIONS: APT imaging can be used to increase diagnostic accuracy with no need to administer gadolinium chelates. APT imaging may provide an added value to [18F]FDG PET in the evaluation of tumor metabolic activity during brain PET/MR studies.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic concordance and metric correlations of amide proton transfer (APT) imaging with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 2-deoxy-2-[18F-]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), using hybrid brain PET/MRI. PROCEDURES: Twenty-one subjects underwent brain gadolinium-enhanced [18F]FDG PET/MRI prospectively. Imaging accuracy was compared between unenhanced MRI, MRI with enhancement, APT-weighted (APTW) images, and PET based on six diagnostic criteria. Among tumors, the McNemar test was further used for concordance assessment between gadolinium-enhanced imaging, APT imaging, and [18F]FDG PET. As well, the relation of metrics between APT imaging and PET was analyzed by the Pearson correlation analysis. RESULTS:APT imaging and gadolinium-enhanced MRI showed superior and similar diagnostic accuracy. APTW signal intensity and gadolinium enhancement were concordant in 19 tumors (100 %), while high [18F]FDG avidity was shown in only 12 (63.2 %). For the metrics from APT imaging and PET, there was significant correlation for 13 hypermetabolic tumors (P < 0.05) and no correlation for the remaining six [18F]FDG-avid tumors. CONCLUSIONS:APT imaging can be used to increase diagnostic accuracy with no need to administer gadolinium chelates. APT imaging may provide an added value to [18F]FDG PET in the evaluation of tumor metabolic activity during brain PET/MR studies.
Authors: Christopher Klenk; Rakhee Gawande; Vy Thao Tran; Jennifer Trinh Leung; Kevin Chi; Daniel Owen; Sandra Luna-Fineman; Kathleen M Sakamoto; Alex McMillan; Andy Quon; Heike E Daldrup-Link Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Craig K Jones; Michael J Schlosser; Peter C M van Zijl; Martin G Pomper; Xavier Golay; Jinyuan Zhou Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Henrik S Thomsen; Sameh K Morcos; Torsten Almén; Marie-France Bellin; Michele Bertolotto; Georg Bongartz; Olivier Clement; Peter Leander; Gertraud Heinz-Peer; Peter Reimer; Fulvio Stacul; Aart van der Molen; Judith A W Webb Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-08-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: George W J Harston; Yee Kai Tee; Nicholas Blockley; Thomas W Okell; Sivarajan Thandeswaran; Gabriel Shaya; Fintan Sheerin; Martino Cellerini; Stephen Payne; Peter Jezzard; Michael Chappell; James Kennedy Journal: Brain Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Jinyuan Zhou; Moritz Zaiss; Linda Knutsson; Phillip Zhe Sun; Sung Soo Ahn; Silvio Aime; Peter Bachert; Jaishri O Blakeley; Kejia Cai; Michael A Chappell; Min Chen; Daniel F Gochberg; Steffen Goerke; Hye-Young Heo; Shanshan Jiang; Tao Jin; Seong-Gi Kim; John Laterra; Daniel Paech; Mark D Pagel; Ji Eun Park; Ravinder Reddy; Akihiko Sakata; Sabine Sartoretti-Schefer; A Dean Sherry; Seth A Smith; Greg J Stanisz; Pia C Sundgren; Osamu Togao; Moriel Vandsburger; Zhibo Wen; Yin Wu; Yi Zhang; Wenzhen Zhu; Zhongliang Zu; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 3.737