PURPOSE: Renal fibrosis is a hallmark of progressive renal disease; however, current clinical tests are insufficient for assessing renal fibrosis. Here we evaluated the utility of quantitative magnetization transfer MRI in detecting renal fibrosis in a murine model of progressive diabetic nephropathy (DN). METHODS: The db/db eNOS-/- mice, a well-recognized model of progressive DN, and normal wild-type mice were imaged at 7T. The quantitative magnetization transfer data were collected in coronal plane using a 2D magnetization transfer prepared spoiled gradient echo sequence with a Gaussian-shaped presaturation pulse. Parameters were derived using a two-pool fitting model. A normal range of cortical pool size ratio (PSR) was defined as Mean±2SD of wild-type kidneys (N = 20). The cortical regions whose PSR values exceeded this threshold (threshold PSR) were assessed. The correlations between the PSR-based and histological (collagen IV or picrosirius red stain) fibrosis measurements were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared with wild-type mice, moderate increases in mean PSR values and scattered clusters of high PSR region were observed in cortex of DN mouse kidneys. Abnormally high PSR regions (% area) that were detected by the threshold PSR were significantly increased in renal cortexes of DN mice. These regions progressively increased on aging and highly correlated with histological fibrosis measures, while the mean PSR values correlated much less. CONCLUSION: Renal fibrosis in DN can be assessed by the quantitative magnetization transfer MRI and threshold analysis. This technique may be used as a novel imaging biomarker for DN and other renal diseases.
PURPOSE:Renal fibrosis is a hallmark of progressive renal disease; however, current clinical tests are insufficient for assessing renal fibrosis. Here we evaluated the utility of quantitative magnetization transfer MRI in detecting renal fibrosis in a murine model of progressive diabetic nephropathy (DN). METHODS: The db/db eNOS-/- mice, a well-recognized model of progressive DN, and normal wild-type mice were imaged at 7T. The quantitative magnetization transfer data were collected in coronal plane using a 2D magnetization transfer prepared spoiled gradient echo sequence with a Gaussian-shaped presaturation pulse. Parameters were derived using a two-pool fitting model. A normal range of cortical pool size ratio (PSR) was defined as Mean±2SD of wild-type kidneys (N = 20). The cortical regions whose PSR values exceeded this threshold (threshold PSR) were assessed. The correlations between the PSR-based and histological (collagen IV or picrosirius red stain) fibrosis measurements were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared with wild-type mice, moderate increases in mean PSR values and scattered clusters of high PSR region were observed in cortex of DN mouse kidneys. Abnormally high PSR regions (% area) that were detected by the threshold PSR were significantly increased in renal cortexes of DN mice. These regions progressively increased on aging and highly correlated with histological fibrosis measures, while the mean PSR values correlated much less. CONCLUSION:Renal fibrosis in DN can be assessed by the quantitative magnetization transfer MRI and threshold analysis. This technique may be used as a novel imaging biomarker for DN and other renal diseases.
Keywords:
MRI; diabetic nephropathy; magnetization transfer ratio (MTR); pool size ratio (PSR); quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT); renal fibrosis
Authors: I Catalaa; R I Grossman; D L Kolson; J K Udupa; L G Nyul; L Wei; X Zhang; M Polansky; L J Mannon; J C McGowan Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Frank C Brosius; Charles E Alpers; Erwin P Bottinger; Matthew D Breyer; Thomas M Coffman; Susan B Gurley; Raymond C Harris; Masao Kakoki; Matthias Kretzler; Edward H Leiter; Moshe Levi; Richard A McIndoe; Kumar Sharma; Oliver Smithies; Katalin Susztak; Nobuyuki Takahashi; Takamune Takahashi Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2009-09-03 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Cassie J Clarke; Tracy J Berg; Joanna Birch; Darren Ennis; Louise Mitchell; Catherine Cloix; Andrew Campbell; David Sumpton; Colin Nixon; Kirsteen Campbell; Victoria L Bridgeman; Peter B Vermeulen; Shane Foo; Eleftherios Kostaras; J Louise Jones; Linda Haywood; Ellie Pulleine; Huabing Yin; Douglas Strathdee; Owen Sansom; Karen Blyth; Iain McNeish; Sara Zanivan; Andrew R Reynolds; Jim C Norman Journal: Curr Biol Date: 2016-03-03 Impact factor: 10.834
Authors: Feng Wang; Suwan Wang; Yahua Zhang; Ke Li; Raymond C Harris; John C Gore; Ming-Zhi Zhang Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2019-07-29 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Kai Jiang; Christopher M Ferguson; Roger C Grimm; Xiangyang Zhu; James F Glockner; Lilach O Lerman Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Eno Hysi; Xiaolin He; Muhannad N Fadhel; Tianzhou Zhang; Adriana Krizova; Michael Ordon; Monica Farcas; Kenneth T Pace; Victoria Mintsopoulos; Warren L Lee; Michael C Kolios; Darren A Yuen Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2020-05-21
Authors: Feng Wang; Daniel C Colvin; Suwan Wang; Hua Li; Zhongliang Zu; Raymond C Harris; Ming-Zhi Zhang; John C Gore Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Mohsen Afarideh; Kai Jiang; Christopher M Ferguson; John R Woollard; James F Glockner; Lilach O Lerman Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 10.065
Authors: Kai Jiang; Yiyuan Fang; Christopher M Ferguson; Hui Tang; Prasanna K Mishra; Slobodan I Macura; Lilach O Lerman Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Atul S Minhas; Jack Sharkey; Edward A Randtke; Patricia Murray; Bettina Wilm; Mark D Pagel; Harish Poptani Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 3.488