Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T18:59:02.937Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - DCE-MRI: acquisition and analysis techniques

from Section 1 - Techniques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2013

Peter B. Barker
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Xavier Golay
Affiliation:
National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London
Gregory Zaharchuk
Affiliation:
Stanford University Medical Center
Get access

Summary

Introduction

There are increasing opportunities to use dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-weighted imaging to characterize tumor and other pathological biology and treatment response, using modern fast sequences that can provide good temporal and spatial resolution combined with good organ coverage [1]. Quantification in MRI is recognized as an important approach to characterize tissue biology. This chapter provides an introduction to the physical concepts of mathematical modeling, image acquisition, and image analysis needed to measure aspects of tissue biology using DCE imaging, in a way that should be accessible for a research-minded clinician.

Quantification in MRI represents a paradigm shift, a new way of thinking about imaging [2]. In qualitative studies, the scanner is a highly sophisticated camera, collecting images that are viewed by an experienced radiologist. In quantitative studies, the scanner is used as a sophisticated measuring device, a scientific instrument able to measure many properties of each tissue voxel (e.g., T1, T2, diffusion tensor,magnetization transfer, metabolite concentration, Ktrans). An everyday example of quantification would be the bathroom scales, used to measure our weight. We expect that the machine output shown on the dial, in kg, will be accurate (i.e., close to the true value), reproducible (i.e., if we make repeated measurements over a short time they will not vary), reliable (the scales always work), and biologically relevant (the quantity of weight does indeed relate to our health). An example of a clinical measurement would be a blood test; we expect it to work reliably every time. This is the aspiration for quantitative MRI: that it should deliver a high-quality measurement that relates only to the patient biology (and not the state of the scanner at the time of measurement).

Type
Chapter
Information
Clinical Perfusion MRI
Techniques and Applications
, pp. 58 - 74
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Jackson, A, Buckley, DL, Parker, GJ.Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Oncology. Berlin: Springer, 2004.Google Scholar
Tofts, PS.Quantitative MRI of the Brain: Measuring Changes Caused by Disease. New York: Wiley, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tofts, PS, Brix, G, Buckley, DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:223–32.3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, MO, Brindle, KM, Evelhoch, JL, et al. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer 2005;92:1599–610.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS, Kermode, AG.Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med 1991;17:357–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naish, JH, McGrath, DM, Bains, LJ, et al. Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic contrast-enhanced CT biomarkers in bladder cancer. Magn Reson Med 2011; 66: 219–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, C, Stadler, WM, Karczmar, GS, et al. Comparison of quantitative parameters in cervix cancer measured by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and CT.Magn Reson Med 2010;63:1601–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS, Shuter, B, Pope, JM.Ni-DTPA doped agarose gel–a phantom material for Gd-DTPA enhancement measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 1993;11:125–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shuter, B, Tofts, PS, Wang, SC, Pope, JM.The relaxivity of Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA in liver and kidney of the Wistar rat. Magn Reson Imaging 1996;14:243–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanisz, GJ, Henkelman, RM.Gd-DTPA relaxivity depends on macromolecular content. Magn Reson Med 2000;44:665–7.3.0.CO;2-M>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spees, WM, Yablonskiy, DA, Oswood, MC, Ackerman, JJ.Water proton MR properties of human blood at 1.5 Tesla: magnetic susceptibility, T(1), T(2), T*(2), and non-Lorentzian signal behavior. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:533–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boron, WF, Boulpaep, EL.Medical Physiology. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2008.Google Scholar
Roberts, C, Hughes, S, Naish, JH, et al. Individually Measured Hematocrit in DCE-MRI studies. Proc Intl Soc Magn Reson Med, Montreal, Canada, 2011; 1078.Google Scholar
Teorell, T.Kinetics of distribution of substances admitted to the body. I. The extravascular modes of administration. Arch Int Pharmacodyn Ther 1937;57:205–25.Google Scholar
Kety, SS.The theory and applications of the exchange of inert gas at the lungs and tissues. Pharmacol Rev 1951;3:1–41.Google Scholar
Weinmann, HJ, Laniado, M, Mutzel, W.Pharmacokinetics of GdDTPA/dimeglumine after intravenous injection into healthy volunteers. Physiol Chem Phys Med NMR 1984;16:167–72.Google ScholarPubMed
Parker, GJ, Roberts, C, Macdonald, A,et al. Experimentally-derived functional form for a population-averaged high-temporal-resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2006;56:993–1000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horsfield, MA, Thornton, JS, Gill, A, et al. A functional form for injected MRI Gd-chelate contrast agent concentration incorporating recirculation, extravasation and excretion. Phys Med Biol 2009;54:2933–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS.Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:91–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sourbron, SP, Buckley, DL.On the scope and interpretation of the Tofts models for DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Med 2011;66:735–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sourbron, SP, Buckley, DL.Tracer kinetic modelling in MRI: estimating perfusion and capillary permeability. Phys Med Biol 2012; 57:R1–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pries, AR, Ley, K, Gaehtgens, P.Generalization of the Fahraeus principle for microvessel networks. Am J Physiol 1986;251:H1324–32.Google ScholarPubMed
Crystal, GJ, Downey, HF, Bashour, FA.Small vessel and total coronary blood volume during intracoronary adenosine. Am J Physiol 1981;241:H194–201.Google ScholarPubMed
Sakai, F, Nakazawa, K, Tazaki, Y, et al. Regional cerebral blood volume and hematocrit measured in normal human volunteers by single-photon emission computed tomography. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1985;5:207–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rempp, KA, Brix, G, Wenz, F, et al.Quantification of regional cerebral blood flow and volume with dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1994;193:637–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaehtgens, P.Flow of blood through narrow capillaries: rheological mechanisms determining capillary hematocrit and apparent viscosity. Biorheology 1980;17:183–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS, Cutajar, M, Mendichovszky, IA, Gordon, I.Accurate and precise measurement of renal filtration and vascular parameters using DCE-MRI and a 3-compartment model. Proc Intl Soc Magn Reson Med, Stockholm, Sweden, 2010; 326.Google Scholar
Tofts, PS, Cutajar, M, Mendichovszky, IA, Peters, AM, Gordon, I.Precise measurement of renal filtration and vascular parameters using a two-compartment model for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the kidney gives realistic normal values. Eur Radiol 2012;22:1320–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawrence, KS, Lee, TY.An adiabatic approximation to the tissue homogeneity model for water exchange in the brain: I. Theoretical derivation. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1998;18:1365–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, SB, West, CM, Davidson, SE, et al. A comparison of tracer kinetic models for T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: application in carcinoma of the cervix. Magn Reson Med 2010;63:691–700.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatabu, H, Tadamura, E, Levin, DL, et al. Quantitative assessment of pulmonary perfusion with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.Magn Reson Med 1999;42:1033–8.3.0.CO;2-7>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohno, Y, Hatabu, H, Murase, K, et al. Quantitative assessment of regional pulmonary perfusion in the entire lung using three-dimensional ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience in 40 subjects. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;20:353–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jerosch-Herold, M.Quantification of myocardial perfusion by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2010;12:57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naish, JH, Kershaw, LE, Buckley, DL, et al. Modeling of contrast agent kinetics in the lung using T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009;61:1507–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brix, G, Kiessling, F, Lucht, R, et al.Microcirculation and microvasculature in breast tumors: pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR image series. Magn Reson Med 2004;52:420–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sourbron, S, Ingrisch, M, Siefert, A, Reiser, M, Herrmann, K.Quantification of cerebral blood flow, cerebral blood volume, and blood-brain-barrier leakage with DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009;62:205–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brix, G, Zwick, S, Kiessling, F, Griebel, J.Pharmacokinetic analysis of tissue microcirculation using nested models: multimodel inference and parameter identifiability. Med Phys 2009;36:2923–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, JA, Wilson, TA.A model for capillary exchange. Am J Physiol 1966;210:1299–303.Google ScholarPubMed
Koh, TS, Zeman, V, Darko, J, et al.The inclusion of capillary distribution in the adiabatic tissue homogeneity model of blood flow. Phys Med Biol 2001;46:1519–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS.QA: quality assurance, accuracy, precision and phantoms. In: Tofts, P, editor, Quantitative MRI of the Brain: Measuring Changes Caused by Disease. Chichester: John Wiley, 2003;55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buonaccorsi, GA, O'Connor, , JP, Caunce, , A, et al. Tracer kinetic model-driven registration for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI time-series data. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:1010–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henderson, E, Rutt, BK, Lee, TY.Temporal sampling requirements for the tracer kinetics modeling of breast disease. Magn Reson Imaging 1998;16:1057–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kostler, H, Ritter, C, Lipp, M, et al.Prebolus quantitative MR heart perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2004;52:296–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Risse, F, Semmler, W, Kauczor, HU, Fink, C.Dual-bolus approach to quantitative measurement of pulmonary perfusion by contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:1284–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korporaal, JG, van den Berg, CA, van Osch, MJ, et al. Phase-based arterial input function measurements in the femoral arteries for quantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and comparison with DCE-CT. Magn Reson Med 2011; 66:1267–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yankeelov, TE, Luci, JJ, Lepage, M, et al. Quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis of DCE-MRI data without an arterial input function: a reference region model. Magn Reson Imaging 2005;23:519–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, C, Little, R, Watson, Y, et al. The effect of blood inflow and B(1)-field inhomogeneity on measurement of the arterial input function in axial 3D spoiled gradient echo dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2011;65:108–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, DL, Shurrab, AE, Cheung, CM, et al. Measurement of single kidney function using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: comparison of two models in human subjects. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:1117–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barker, GJ, Simmons, A, Arridge, SR, Tofts, PS.A simple method for investigating the effects of non-uniformity of radiofrequency transmission and radiofrequency reception in MRI. Br J Radiol 1998;71:59–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brookes, JA, Redpath, TW, Gilbert, FJ, Murray, AD, Staff, RT.Accuracy of T1 measurement in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI using two- and three-dimensional variable flip angle fast low-angle shot. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;9:163–71.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, GJ, Barker, GJ, Tofts, PS.Accurate multislice gradient echo T(1) measurement in the presence of non-ideal RF pulse shape and RF field nonuniformity. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:838–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowell, NG, Tofts, PS.Fast, accurate, and precise mapping of the RF field in vivo using the 180 degrees signal null. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:622–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS, Berkowitz, B, Schnall, MD.Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn Reson Med 1995;33:564–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fritz-Hansen, T, Rostrup, E, Larsson, HB, Sondergaard, L, Ring, P, Henriksen, O.Measurement of the arterial concentration of Gd-DTPA using MRI: a step toward quantitative perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 1996;36:225–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, JP, Jayson, GC, Jackson, A,et al. Enhancing fraction predicts clinical outcome following first-line chemotherapy in patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:6130–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donaldson, SB, Buckley, DL, O'Connor, JP, et al. Enhancing fraction measured using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI predicts disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Cancer 2010;102:23–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mills, SJ, Soh, C, O'Connor, JP, et al. Tumour enhancing fraction (EnF) in glioma: relationship to tumour grade. Eur Radiol 2009;19:1489–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bagher-Ebadian, H, Jain, R, Nejad-Davarani, SP, et al. Model selection for DCE-T1 studies in glioblastoma. Magn Reson Med 2011;68:241–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, CJ, Mills, SJ, O'Connor, JP, et al. Quantifying spatial heterogeneity in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameter maps. Magn Reson Med 2009;62:488–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canuto, HC, McLachlan, C, Kettunen, MI, et al. Characterization of image heterogeneity using 2D Minkowski functionals increases the sensitivity of detection of a targeted MRI contrast agent. Magn Reson Med 2009;61:1218–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts, PS, Davies, GR, Dehmeshki, J.Histograms: measuring subtle diffuse disease. In: Tofts, P, editor. Quantitative MRI of the Brain: Measuring Changes Caused by Disease. Chichester: John Wiley, 2003;581–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tofts, PS, Benton, CE, Weil, RS, et al. Quantitative analysis of whole-tumor Gd enhancement histograms predicts malignant transformation in low-grade gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:208–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehmeshki, J, Ruto, AC, Arridge, S, et al. Analysis of MTR histograms in multiple sclerosis using principal components and multiple discriminant analysis. Magn Reson Med 2001;46:600–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tofts PS, Stoyanova R. Fast modelling of slow DCE data from prostate: rate constant (kep) and extracellular extravascular space (EES: ve) both distinguish hypoxic regions in the tumour. European Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine and Biology Congress Leipzig 2011; 27.
Buckley, DL, Roberts, C, Parker, GJ, Logue, JP, Hutchinson, CE.Prostate cancer: evaluation of vascular characteristics with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging–initial experience. Radiology 2004;233:709–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgson, RJ, Barnes, T, Connolly, S, et al. Changes underlying the dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. Skeletal Radiol 2008;37:201–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×