Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 3, 2026
Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of an Orthotopic Pancreatic Cancer Mouse Model
Published on: April 18, 2015
Assessment of repeatability and treatment response in early phase clinical trials using DCE-MRI: comparison of
Mihaela Rata1, David J Collins1, James Darcy1
1CR-UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Objectives:
Pharmacokinetic (PK) modelling of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) data requires a reliable measure of the arterial input function (AIF) to robustly characterise tumour vascular properties. This study compared repeatability and treatment-response effects of DCE-MRI-derived PK parameters using a population-averaged AIF and three patient-specific AIFs derived from pre-bolus MRI, DCE-MRI and dynamic contrast computed tomography (DC-CT) data.
Methods:
The four approaches were compared in 13 patients with abdominal metastases. Baseline repeatability [Bland-Altman statistics; coefficient of variation (CoV)], cohort percentage change and p value (paired t test) and number of patients with significant DCE-MRI parameter change post-treatment (limits of agreement) were assessed.
Results:
Individual AIFs were obtained for all 13 patients with pre-bolus MRI and DC-CT-derived AIFs, but only 10/13 patients had AIFs measurable from DCE-MRI data. The best CoV (7.5 %) of the transfer coefficient between blood plasma and extravascular extracellular space (K (trans)) was obtained using a population-averaged AIF. All four AIF methods detected significant treatment changes: the most significant was the DC-CT-derived AIF. The population-based AIF was similar to or better than the pre-bolus and DCE-MRI-derived AIFs.
Conclusions:
A population-based AIF is the recommended approach for measuring cohort and individual effects since it has the best repeatability and none of the PK parameters derived using measured AIFs demonstrated an improvement in treatment sensitivity.
Key Points:
• Pharmacokinetic modelling of DCE-MRI data requires a reliable measure of AIF. • Individual MRI-DCE-derived AIFs cannot reliably be extracted from patients. • All four AIF methods detected significant K (trans) changes after treatment. • A population-based AIF can be recommended for measuring cohort treatment responses in trials.
More Related Videos
08:59Use of a Multi-compartment Dynamic Single Enzyme Phantom for Studies of Hyperpolarized Magnetic Resonance Agents
Published on: April 15, 2016
09:32Time-Resolved, Dynamic Computed Tomography Angiography for Characterization of Aortic Endoleaks and Treatment Guidance via 2D-3D Fusion-Imaging
Published on: December 9, 2021
