𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic contrast-enhanced CT biomarkers in bladder cancer

✍ Scribed by J. H. Naish; D. M. McGrath; L. J. Bains; K. Passera; C. Roberts; Y. Watson; S. Cheung; M. B. Taylor; J. P. Logue; D. L. Buckley; J. Tessier; H. Young; J. C. Waterton; G. J. M. Parker


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2011
Tongue
English
Weight
430 KB
Volume
66
Category
Article
ISSN
0740-3194

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Abstract

Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI (DCE‐MRI) is frequently used to provide response biomarkers in clinical trials of novel cancer therapeutics but assessment of their physiological accuracy is difficult. DCE‐CT provides an independent probe of similar pharmacokinetic processes and may be modeled in the same way as DCE‐MRI to provide purportedly equivalent physiological parameters. In this study, DCE‐MRI and DCE‐CT were directly compared in subjects with primary bladder cancer to assess the degree to which the model parameters report modeled physiology rather than artefacts of the measurement technique and to determine the interchangeability of the techniques in a clinical trial setting. The biomarker K^trans^ obtained by fitting an extended version of the Kety model voxelwise to both DCE‐MRI and DCE‐CT data was in excellent agreement (mean across subjects was 0.085 ± 0.030 min^−1^ for DCE‐MRI and 0.087 ± 0.033 min^−1^ for DCE‐CT, intermodality coefficient of variation 9%). The parameter v~p~ derived from DCE‐CT was significantly greater than that derived from DCE‐MRI (0.018 ± 0.006 compared to 0.009 ± 0.008, P = 0.0007) and v~e~ was in reasonable agreement only for low values. The study provides evidence that the biomarker K^trans^ is a robust parameter indicative of the underlying physiology and relatively independent of the method of measurement. Magn Reson Med, 2011. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.


📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES


Fundamentals of tracer kinetics for dyna
✍ Tong San Koh; Sotirios Bisdas; Dow Mu Koh; Choon Hua Thng 📂 Article 📅 2011 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 340 KB

## Abstract Tracer kinetic methods employed for quantitative analysis of dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) share common roots with earlier tracer studies involving arterial‐venous sampling and other dynamic imaging modalities. This article reviews the essential founda

Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to quantif
✍ Lisa Cartwright; Walid A. Farhat; Christopher Sherman; Jun Chen; Paul Babyn; Her 📂 Article 📅 2006 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 185 KB

## Abstract Tissue engineered organs require an immediately perfused vascular tree. Currently, neovascularization assessment requires animal sacrifice and graft harvest. In this pilot study we assess whether neovascularization of an engineered urinary bladder construct is enhanced with vascular‐der

Quantifying angiogenesis in VEGF-enhance
✍ Hai-Ling Margaret Cheng; Chad Wallis; Zhiping Shou; Walid A. Farhat 📂 Article 📅 2007 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 469 KB

## Abstract ## Purpose To compare Gadomer, a macromolecular magnetic resonance (MR) contrast agent, and gadolinium diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd‐DTPA) for quantifying angiogenesis in tissue‐engineered bladder constructs. ## Materials and Methods Constructs enhanced with vascular endoth

Quantifying spatial heterogeneity in dyn
✍ Chris J. Rose; Samantha J. Mills; James P. B. O'Connor; Giovanni A. Buonaccorsi; 📂 Article 📅 2009 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 471 KB

## Abstract Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI is becoming a standard tool for imaging‐based trials of anti‐vascular/angiogenic agents in cancer. So far, however, biomarkers derived from DCE‐MRI parameter maps have largely neglected the fact that the maps have spatial structure and instead focussed on d

Method for the quantitative assessment o
✍ Karl Hittmair; Gregor Gomiscek; Karl Langenberger; Michael Recht; Herwig Imhof; 📂 Article 📅 1994 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 499 KB

## Abstract In previous papers relative signal intensity increase was used as a quantitative assessment parameter for contrast uptake in contrastenhanced MRI. However, relative signal intensity increase does not only reflect contrast uptake but depends also on tissue parameters (native __T__~1~ rel