Quantitative Evaluation of Dual-flip-angle T1 Mapping on DCE-MRI Kinetic Parameter Estimation in Head and Neck

Overview

Journal Quant Imaging Med Surg

Specialty Radiology

Date 2013 Jan 5

PMID 23289084

Citations 22

Authors

Jing Yuan

Steven Kwok Keung Chow

David Ka Wai Yeung

Anil T Ahuja

Ann D King

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate the kinetic parameter estimation for head and neck (HN) dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI with dual-flip-angle (DFA) T1 mapping.

Materials And Methods: Clinical DCE-MRI datasets of 23 patients with HN tumors were included in this study. T1 maps were generated based on multiple-flip-angle (MFA) method and different DFA combinations. Tofts model parameter maps of k(ep), K(trans) and v(p) based on MFA and DFAs were calculated and compared. Fitted parameter by MFA and DFAs were quantitatively evaluated in primary tumor, salivary gland and muscle.

Results: T1 mapping deviations by DFAs produced remarkable kinetic parameter estimation deviations in head and neck tissues. In particular, the DFA of [2º, 7º] overestimated, while [7º, 12º] and [7º, 15º] underestimated K(trans) and v(p), significantly (P<0.01). [2º, 15º] achieved the smallest but still statistically significant overestimation for K(trans) and v(p) in primary tumors, 32.1% and 16.2% respectively. k(ep) fitting results by DFAs were relatively close to the MFA reference compared to K(trans) and v(p).

Conclusions: T1 deviations induced by DFA could result in significant errors in kinetic parameter estimation, particularly K(trans) and v(p), through Tofts model fitting. MFA method should be more reliable and robust for accurate quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis in head and neck.

Citing Articles

An Exploratory Study: Can Native T1 Mapping Differentiate Sarcoma from Benign Soft Tissue Tumors at 1.5 T and 3 T?.

Dupont L, Delattre B, Sans Merce M, Poletti P, Boudabbous S Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(22).

PMID: 39594807 PMC: 11592662. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16223852.

Utility of dual-energy CT and advanced multiparametric MRI based imaging biomarkers of pancreatic fibrosis in grading the severity of chronic pancreatitis.

Narang M, Singh A, Mahapatra S, Gunjan D, Sharma S, Srivastava D Abdom Radiol (NY). 2024; 49(10):3528-3539.

PMID: 38900324 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04443-0.

Whole-cerebrum guanidino and amide CEST mapping at 3 T by a 3D stack-of-spirals gradient echo acquisition.

Wang K, Ju L, Song Y, Blair L, Xie K, Liu C Magn Reson Med. 2024; 92(4):1456-1470.

PMID: 38748853 PMC: 11262991. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.30134.

Optimal time for early therapeutic response prediction in nasopharyngeal carcinoma with functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Mui A, Lee A, Ng W, Lee V, Vardhanabhuti V, Man S Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2023; 27:100458.

PMID: 37457666 PMC: 10339040. DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100458.

K Calculation Using Reference Method Corrected Native T for Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

Negi P, Mehta S, Jena A, Rana P J Med Phys. 2023; 48(1):19-25.

PMID: 37342602 PMC: 10277302. DOI: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_90_22.

References

Henderson E, McKinnon G, Lee T, Rutt B . A fast 3D look-locker method for volumetric T1 mapping. Magn Reson Imaging. 1999; 17(8):1163-71. DOI: 10.1016/s0730-725x(99)00025-9. View

Brookes J, Redpath T, Gilbert F, Murray A, Staff R . 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(2):163-71. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1522-2586(199902)9:2<163::aid-jmri3>3.0.co;2-l. View

Bisdas S, Seitz O, Middendorp M, Chambron-Pinho N, Bisdas T, Vogl T . An exploratory pilot study into the association between microcirculatory parameters derived by MRI-based pharmacokinetic analysis and glucose utilization estimated by PET-CT imaging in head and neck cancer. Eur Radiol. 2010; 20(10):2358-66. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1803-x. View

Yang S, Law M, Zagzag D, Wu H, Cha S, Golfinos J . Dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging measurements of endothelial permeability: differentiation between atypical and typical meningiomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003; 24(8):1554-9. PMC: 7974003. View

Roberts C, Little R, Watson Y, Zhao S, Buckley D, Parker G . 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. 2010; 65(1):108-19. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22593. View

Loo C, Teertstra H, Rodenhuis S, van de Vijver M, Hannemann J, Muller S . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prediction of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: initial results. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 191(5):1331-8. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.07.3567. View

Cron G, Kelcz F, Santyr G . Improvement in breast lesion characterization with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using pharmacokinetic modeling and bookend T(1) measurements. Magn Reson Med. 2004; 51(5):1066-70. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20042. View

Zhu D, Penn R . Full-brain T1 mapping through inversion recovery fast spin echo imaging with time-efficient slice ordering. Magn Reson Med. 2005; 54(3):725-31. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20602. View

Wang D, Shi L, Wang Y, Yuan J, Yeung D, King A . Concatenated and parallel optimization for the estimation of T1 map in FLASH MRI with multiple flip angles. Magn Reson Med. 2010; 63(5):1431-6. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22294. View

10.

Yu Y, Jiang Q, Miao Y, Li J, Bao S, Wang H . Quantitative analysis of clinical dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for evaluating treatment response in human breast cancer. Radiology. 2010; 257(1):47-55. PMC: 2941722. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10092169. View

11.

Craciunescu O, Brizel D, Cleland E, Yoo D, Muradyan N, Carroll M . Dynamic contrast enhanced-MRI in head and neck cancer patients: variability of the precontrast longitudinal relaxation time (T10). Med Phys. 2010; 37(6):2683-92. DOI: 10.1118/1.3427487. View

12.

Brookes J, Redpath T, Gilbert F, Needham G, Murray A . Measurement of spin-lattice relaxation times with FLASH for dynamic MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol. 1996; 69(819):206-14. DOI: 10.1259/0007-1285-69-819-206. View

13.

Deoni S, Rutt B, Peters T . Rapid combined T1 and T2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state. Magn Reson Med. 2003; 49(3):515-26. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.10407. View

14.

Andreisek G, White L, Yang Y, Robinson E, Cheng H, Sussman M . Delayed gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging of articular cartilage: three-dimensional T1 mapping with variable flip angles and B1 correction. Radiology. 2009; 252(3):865-73. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2531081115. View

15.

Noeske R, Seifert F, Rhein K, Rinneberg H . Human cardiac imaging at 3 T using phased array coils. Magn Reson Med. 2000; 44(6):978-82. DOI: 10.1002/1522-2594(200012)44:6<978::aid-mrm22>3.0.co;2-9. View

16.

Brix G, Semmler W, Port R, Schad L, Layer G, Lorenz W . Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1991; 15(4):621-8. DOI: 10.1097/00004728-199107000-00018. View

17.

Koh T, Thng C, Lee P, Hartono S, Rumpel H, Goh B . Hepatic metastases: in vivo assessment of perfusion parameters at dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with dual-input two-compartment tracer kinetics model. Radiology. 2008; 249(1):307-20. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2483071958. View

18.

Tofts P . Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1997; 7(1):91-101. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1880070113. View

19.

Tofts P, Kermode A . Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med. 1991; 17(2):357-67. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910170208. View

20.

Rijpkema M, Kaanders J, Joosten F, van der Kogel A, Heerschap A . Method for quantitative mapping of dynamic MRI contrast agent uptake in human tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001; 14(4):457-63. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1207. View