Visualizing tumor environment with perfusion and diffusion MRI: Computational challenges

Visualizing tumor environment is a critical task for assessing treatment response as well as tailoring therapy to the individual by better understanding the viable, necrotic and hypoxic areas. While a number of imaging modalities can provide complementary information about the tumor composition, there are several constraints regarding radiation, cost and patient tolerance that dictate the need of non-invasive and cost-effective methods to be used for tumor imaging in the context of personalized medicine. In this paper we present some of the major challenges in imaging tumor environment using perfusion and diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) based on the actual computational workflows and discuss important computational issues that affect the robustness, reproducibility as well as the clinical significance of the extracted clinical biomarkers.

[1]  H. Larsson,et al.  Evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MRI in the differentiation of tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis , 2013, Neuroradiology.

[2]  B. Siewert,et al.  Acute human stroke studied by whole brain echo planar diffusion‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging , 1995, Annals of neurology.

[3]  W. Brück,et al.  Clinical and radiographic spectrum of pathologically confirmed tumefactive multiple sclerosis , 2008, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[4]  L. Axel,et al.  Quality assurance methods and phantoms for magnetic resonance imaging: report of AAPM nuclear magnetic resonance Task Group No. 1. , 1990, Medical physics.

[5]  Y. Ni,et al.  Magnetic resonance diffusion-perfusion mismatch in acute ischemic stroke: An update. , 2012, World journal of radiology.

[6]  George C. Manikis,et al.  Validating the Imaging Biomarker: The Proof of Efficacy and Effectiveness , 2017 .

[7]  Katerina Nikiforaki,et al.  Imaging Biomarker Model-Based Analysis , 2017 .

[8]  P. Grenier,et al.  MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. , 1986, Radiology.

[9]  Kostas Marias,et al.  Assessing Treatment Response Through Generalized Pharmacokinetic Modeling of DCE-MRI Data , 2015, Cancer informatics.

[10]  E. Rostrup,et al.  Measurement of the arterial concentration of Gd‐DTPA using MRI: A step toward quantitative perfusion imaging , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[11]  Gregory S Karczmar,et al.  MRI of the tumor microenvironment , 2002, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[12]  Glyn Johnson,et al.  Comparison of cerebral blood volume and vascular permeability from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with glioma grade. , 2004, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[13]  Mithat Gönen,et al.  Quantitative imaging biomarkers: A review of statistical methods for technical performance assessment , 2015, Statistical methods in medical research.

[14]  Georgios C. Manikis,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of pancreatic cancer: A comparison of mono-exponential, bi-exponential and non-Gaussian kurtosis models , 2016, European journal of radiology open.