Zhongxu An1, Vivek Tiwari1, Jeannie Baxter1, Michael Levy2, Kimmo J Hatanpaa3, Edward Pan2,4,5, Elizabeth A Maher4,5,6,7, Toral R Patel2,4, Bruce E Mickey2,5,7, Changho Choi1,5,8. 1. Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 2. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 3. Department of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 4. Department of Neurology and Neurotherapeutics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 5. Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 7. Annette Strauss Center for Neuro-Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas. 8. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop 3D high-resolution imaging of 2-hydroxyglutarate (2HG) at 3T in vivo. METHODS: Echo-planar spectroscopic imaging with dual-readout alternated-gradients (DRAG-EPSI), which was recently reported for 2D imaging of 2HG at 7T, was tested for 3D imaging of 2HG at 3T. The frequency drifts and acoustic noise induced by DRAG-EPSI were investigated in comparison with conventional EPSI. Four patients with IDH-mutant gliomas were enrolled for 3D imaging of 2HG and other metabolites. A previously reported 2HG-tailored TE 97-ms PRESS sequence preceded the DRAG-EPSI readout gradients. Unsuppressed water, acquired with EPSI, was used as reference for multi-channel combination, eddy-current compensation, and metabolite quantification. Spectral fitting was conducted with the LCModel using in-house basis sets. RESULTS: With gradient strength of 4 mT/m and slew rate of 20 mT/m/ms, DRAG-EPSI produced frequency drifts smaller by 5.5-fold and acoustic noise lower by 25 dB compared to conventional EPSI. In a 19-min scan, 3D DRAG-EPSI provided images of 2HG with precision (CRLB <10%) at a resolution of 10 × 10 × 10 mm3 for a field of view of 240 × 180 × 80 mm3 . 2HG was estimated to be 5 mM in a pre-treatment patient. In 3 post-surgery patients, 2HG estimates were 3-6 mM, and the 2HG distribution was different from the water-T2 image pattern or highly concentrated in the post-contrast enhancing region. CONCLUSION: Together with 2HG-optimized PRESS, DRAG-EPSI provides an effective tool for reliable 3D high-resolution imaging of 2HG at 3T in vivo.
PURPOSE: To develop 3D high-resolution imaging of 2-hydroxyglutarate (2HG) at 3T in vivo. METHODS: Echo-planar spectroscopic imaging with dual-readout alternated-gradients (DRAG-EPSI), which was recently reported for 2D imaging of 2HG at 7T, was tested for 3D imaging of 2HG at 3T. The frequency drifts and acoustic noise induced by DRAG-EPSI were investigated in comparison with conventional EPSI. Four patients with IDH-mutant gliomas were enrolled for 3D imaging of 2HG and other metabolites. A previously reported 2HG-tailored TE 97-ms PRESS sequence preceded the DRAG-EPSI readout gradients. Unsuppressed water, acquired with EPSI, was used as reference for multi-channel combination, eddy-current compensation, and metabolite quantification. Spectral fitting was conducted with the LCModel using in-house basis sets. RESULTS: With gradient strength of 4 mT/m and slew rate of 20 mT/m/ms, DRAG-EPSI produced frequency drifts smaller by 5.5-fold and acoustic noise lower by 25 dB compared to conventional EPSI. In a 19-min scan, 3D DRAG-EPSI provided images of 2HG with precision (CRLB <10%) at a resolution of 10 × 10 × 10 mm3 for a field of view of 240 × 180 × 80 mm3 . 2HG was estimated to be 5 mM in a pre-treatment patient. In 3 post-surgery patients, 2HG estimates were 3-6 mM, and the 2HG distribution was different from the water-T2 image pattern or highly concentrated in the post-contrast enhancing region. CONCLUSION: Together with 2HG-optimized PRESS, DRAG-EPSI provides an effective tool for reliable 3D high-resolution imaging of 2HG at 3T in vivo.
Authors: Changho Choi; Jack M Raisanen; Sandeep K Ganji; Song Zhang; Sarah S McNeil; Zhongxu An; Akshay Madan; Kimmo J Hatanpaa; Vamsidhara Vemireddy; Christie A Sheppard; Dwight Oliver; Keith M Hulsey; Vivek Tiwari; Tomoyuki Mashimo; James Battiste; Samuel Barnett; Christopher J Madden; Toral R Patel; Edward Pan; Craig R Malloy; Bruce E Mickey; Robert M Bachoo; Elizabeth A Maher Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kourosh Jafari-Khouzani; Franziska Loebel; Wolfgang Bogner; Otto Rapalino; Gilberto R Gonzalez; Elizabeth Gerstner; Andrew S Chi; Tracy T Batchelor; Bruce R Rosen; Jan Unkelbach; Helen A Shih; Daniel P Cahill; Ovidiu C Andronesi Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Lenny Dang; David W White; Stefan Gross; Bryson D Bennett; Mark A Bittinger; Edward M Driggers; Valeria R Fantin; Hyun Gyung Jang; Shengfang Jin; Marie C Keenan; Kevin M Marks; Robert M Prins; Patrick S Ward; Katharine E Yen; Linda M Liau; Joshua D Rabinowitz; Lewis C Cantley; Craig B Thompson; Matthew G Vander Heiden; Shinsan M Su Journal: Nature Date: 2009-12-10 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Matthew L Zierhut; Esin Ozturk-Isik; Albert P Chen; Ilwoo Park; Daniel B Vigneron; Sarah J Nelson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: D Williams Parsons; Siân Jones; Xiaosong Zhang; Jimmy Cheng-Ho Lin; Rebecca J Leary; Philipp Angenendt; Parminder Mankoo; Hannah Carter; I-Mei Siu; Gary L Gallia; Alessandro Olivi; Roger McLendon; B Ahmed Rasheed; Stephen Keir; Tatiana Nikolskaya; Yuri Nikolsky; Dana A Busam; Hanna Tekleab; Luis A Diaz; James Hartigan; Doug R Smith; Robert L Strausberg; Suely Kazue Nagahashi Marie; Sueli Mieko Oba Shinjo; Hai Yan; Gregory J Riggins; Darell D Bigner; Rachel Karchin; Nick Papadopoulos; Giovanni Parmigiani; Bert Vogelstein; Victor E Velculescu; Kenneth W Kinzler Journal: Science Date: 2008-09-04 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Changho Choi; Sandeep K Ganji; Ralph J DeBerardinis; Kimmo J Hatanpaa; Dinesh Rakheja; Zoltan Kovacs; Xiao-Li Yang; Tomoyuki Mashimo; Jack M Raisanen; Isaac Marin-Valencia; Juan M Pascual; Christopher J Madden; Bruce E Mickey; Craig R Malloy; Robert M Bachoo; Elizabeth A Maher Journal: Nat Med Date: 2012-01-26 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: L McCarthy; G Verma; G Hangel; A Neal; B A Moffat; J P Stockmann; O C Andronesi; P Balchandani; C G Hadjipanayis Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 4.966
Authors: Pegah Askari; Ivan E Dimitrov; Sandeep K Ganji; Vivek Tiwari; Michael Levy; Toral R Patel; Edward Pan; Bruce E Mickey; Craig R Malloy; Elizabeth A Maher; Changho Choi Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Bernhard Strasser; Nicolas S Arango; Jason P Stockmann; Borjan Gagoski; Bijaya Thapa; Xianqi Li; Wolfgang Bogner; Philipp Moser; Julia Small; Daniel P Cahill; Tracy T Batchelor; Jorg Dietrich; Andre van der Kouwe; Jacob White; Elfar Adalsteinsson; Ovidiu C Andronesi Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 4.478
Authors: Andrew A Maudsley; Ovidiu C Andronesi; Peter B Barker; Alberto Bizzi; Wolfgang Bogner; Anke Henning; Sarah J Nelson; Stefan Posse; Dikoma C Shungu; Brian J Soher Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Xianqi Li; Bernhard Strasser; Kourosh Jafari-Khouzani; Bijaya Thapa; Julia Small; Daniel P Cahill; Jorg Dietrich; Tracy T Batchelor; Ovidiu C Andronesi Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 29.146