Assessment of tumor treatment response using active contrast encoding (ACE)-MRI: Comparison with conventional DCE-MRI.

PurposeTo investigate the validity of contrast kinetic parameter estimates from Active Contrast Encoding (ACE)-MRI against those from conventional Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced (DCE)-MRI for evaluation of tumor treatment response in mouse tumor models.MethodsThe ACE-MRI method that incorporates measurement of T1 and B1 into the enhancement curve washout region, was implemented on a 7T MRI scanner to measure tracer kinetic model parameters of 4T1 and GL261 tumors with treatment using bevacizumab and 5FU. A portion of the same ACE-MRI data was used for conventional DCE-MRI data analysis with a separately measured pre-contrast T1 map. Tracer kinetic model parameters, such as Ktrans (permeability area surface product) and ve (extracellular space volume fraction), estimated from ACE-MRI were compared with those from DCE-MRI, in terms of correlation and Bland-Altman analyses.ResultsA three-fold increase of the median Ktrans by treatment was observed in the flank 4T1 tumors by both ACE-MRI and DCE-MRI. In contrast, the brain tumors did not show a significant change by the treatment in either ACE-MRI or DCE-MRI. Ktrans and ve values of the tumors from ACE-MRI were strongly correlated with those from DCE-MRI methods with correlation coefficients of 0.92 and 0.78, respectively, for the median values of 17 tumors. The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a mean difference of -0.01 min-1 for Ktrans with the 95% limits of agreement of -0.12 min-1 to 0.09 min-1, and -0.05 with -0.37 to 0.26 for ve.ConclusionThe tracer kinetic model parameters estimated from ACE-MRI and their changes by treatment closely matched those of DCE-MRI, which suggests that ACE-MRI can be used in place of conventional DCE-MRI for tumor progression monitoring and treatment response evaluation with a reduced scan time

Diffusion MRI outside the brain

This manuscript provides an overview of recent developments in Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (DWI) outside the brain, focusing on liver, breast, prostate, muskuloskeletal (MSK) and cardiac applications. A general introduction to cross-cutting acquisition and image processing challenges is first provided. These often include short T2 relaxation times, the need to image a large field-of-view with the resulting complications in shimming the B0 field and achieving good fat suppression. Some of the strategies developed for dealing with motion, namely cardiac and respiratory motion are described. Specific sections are then presented for each of the aforementioned organs. A motivation for the clinical applicability of DWI is first provided, followed by specific image acquisition and processing considerations. Quantitative imaging is becoming standard in clinical practice, and the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient is routinely estimated in the liver, breast and prostate. Application of alternative signal models in these organs is being explored, including both the Intravoxel Incoherent Motion and Diffusion Kurtosis models. Ongoing efforts are focused on evaluating the potential clinical added value of the extra parameters and on improving their repeatability. MSK and cardiac DWI have shown potential for assessing pathological changes in fiber architecture, but further validation is required to enable application in the clinical setting.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio