A comparison of tracer kinetic models for T1‐weighted dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI: Application in carcinoma of the cervix

The Tofts tracer kinetic models are often used to analyze dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI data. They are derived from a general two‐compartment exchange model (2CXM) but assume negligible plasma mean transit time. The 2CXM estimates tissue plasma perfusion and capillary permeability‐surface area; the Tofts models estimate the transfer constant Ktrans, which reflects a combination of these two parameters. The aims of this study were to compare the 2CXM and Tofts models and report microvascular parameters in patients with cervical cancer. Thirty patients were scanned pretreatment using a dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI protocol with a 3 sec temporal resolution and a total scan duration of 4 min. Whole‐tumor parameters were estimated with both models. The 2CXM provided superior fits to the data for all patients (all 30 P values < 0.005), and significantly different parameter estimates were obtained (P < 0.01). Ktrans (mean = 0.35 ± 0.26 min−1) did not equal absolute values of tissue plasma perfusion (mean = 0.65 ± 0.56 mL/mL/min) or permeability‐surface area (mean = 0.14 ± 0.09 mL/mL/min) but correlated strongly with tissue plasma perfusion (r = 0.944; P = 0.01). Average plasma mean transit time, calculated with the 2CXM, was 22 ± 16 sec, suggesting the assumption of negligible plasma mean transit time is not appropriate in this dataset and the 2CXM is better suited for its analysis than the Tofts models. The results demonstrate the importance of selecting an appropriate tracer kinetic model in dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 63:691–700, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  Maximilian Reiser,et al.  Quantification of cerebral blood flow, cerebral blood volume, and blood–brain‐barrier leakage with DCE‐MRI , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[2]  Evis Sala,et al.  Semiquantitative and quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging measurements predict radiation response in cervix cancer. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  A. Jackson,et al.  Modeling of contrast agent kinetics in the lung using T1‐weighted dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[4]  M. Neeman,et al.  Molecular imaging of angiogenesis , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[5]  M. Knopp,et al.  Cervical carcinoma: standard and pharmacokinetic analysis of time-intensity curves for assessment of tumor angiogenesis and patient survival , 1999, Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine.

[6]  A. Jackson,et al.  Experimentally‐derived functional form for a population‐averaged high‐temporal‐resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI , 2006, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[7]  D J Collins,et al.  Evaluation of response to treatment using DCE-MRI: the relationship between initial area under the gadolinium curve (IAUGC) and quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  Stephen L. Brown,et al.  Model Selection in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Measurements of Vascular Permeability: Gadomer in a 9L Model of Rat Cerebral Tumor , 2006, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[9]  Frédérique Frouin,et al.  New criteria for assessing fit quality in dynamic contrast‐enhanced T1‐weighted MRI for perfusion and permeability imaging , 2005, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[10]  Frédérique Frouin,et al.  Comprehensive model for simultaneous MRI determination of perfusion and permeability using a blood-pool agent in rats rhabdomyosarcoma , 2005, European Radiology.

[11]  Anthony Fyles,et al.  Assessment of the tumor microenvironment in cervix cancer using dynamic contrast enhanced CT, interstitial fluid pressure and oxygen measurements. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  P. Choyke Contrast agents for imaging tumor angiogenesis: is bigger better? , 2005, Radiology.

[13]  M. Simons Angiogenesis: where do we stand now? , 2005, Circulation.

[14]  Geoffrey J. M. Parker,et al.  Tracer Kinetic Modelling for T1-Weighted DCE-MRI , 2005 .

[15]  G. Parker,et al.  Prostate cancer: evaluation of vascular characteristics with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging--initial experience. , 2004, Radiology.

[16]  R. Fisher,et al.  Significance of tumor volume and corpus uteri invasion in cervical cancer patients treated by radiotherapy , 2004, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[17]  R. Lucht,et al.  Microcirculation and microvasculature in breast tumors: Pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR image series , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[18]  J R Griffiths,et al.  Assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapeutics using MRI: recommendations for appropriate methodology for clinical trials. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[19]  David L Buckley,et al.  Prediction of radiotherapy outcome using dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of carcinoma of the cervix. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  David L Buckley,et al.  Uncertainty in the analysis of tracer kinetics using dynamic contrast‐enhanced T1‐weighted MRI , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[21]  H Lyng,et al.  Assessment of tumor oxygenation in human cervical carcinoma by use of dynamic Gd‐DTPA‐enhanced MR imaging , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[22]  J. Reiber,et al.  Tumor diameter and volume assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of outcome for invasive cervical cancer. , 2001, Gynecologic oncology.

[23]  M V Knopp,et al.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in oncology. , 2001, Topics in magnetic resonance imaging : TMRI.

[24]  H. Lyng,et al.  Intra‐ and intertumor heterogeneity in blood perfusion of human cervical cancer before treatment and after radiotherapy , 2001, International journal of cancer.

[25]  W Zhen,et al.  Pixel analysis of MR perfusion imaging in predicting radiation therapy outcome in cervical cancer , 2000, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[26]  J P Logue,et al.  Tumour oxygenation levels correlate with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging parameters in carcinoma of the cervix. , 2000, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[27]  H Okamura,et al.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of uterine cervical cancer: pharmacokinetic analysis with histopathologic correlation and its importance in predicting the outcome of radiation therapy. , 2000, Radiology.

[28]  J. Oakley,et al.  Contrast enhanced dynamic MRI of cervical carcinoma during radiotherapy: early prediction of tumour regression rate. , 1999, The British journal of radiology.

[29]  W T Yuh,et al.  MR microcirculation assessment in cervical cancer: Correlations with histomorphological tumor markers and clinical outcome , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[30]  J L Evelhoch,et al.  Key factors in the acquisition of contrast kinetic data for oncology , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[31]  M. Knopp,et al.  Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast‐enhanced t1‐weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: Standardized quantities and symbols , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[32]  M. Knopp,et al.  Cervical carcinoma: standard and pharmacokinetic analysis of time-intensity curves for assessment of tumor angiogenesis and patient survival. , 1999 .

[33]  T W Redpath,et al.  Accuracy of T1 measurement in dynamic contrast‐enhanced breast MRI using two‐ and three‐dimensional variable flip angle fast low‐angle shot , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[34]  J C Ehrhardt,et al.  Prediction of tumor control in patients with cervical cancer: analysis of combined volume and dynamic enhancement pattern by MR imaging. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[35]  Ting-Yim Lee,et al.  An Adiabatic Approximation to the Tissue Homogeneity Model for Water Exchange in the Brain: I. Theoretical Derivation , 1998, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[36]  M V Knopp,et al.  Angiogenic activity of cervical carcinoma: assessment by functional magnetic resonance imaging-based parameters and a histomorphological approach in correlation with disease outcome. , 1998, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[37]  G Brix,et al.  Uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of standard and pharmacokinetic analysis of time-intensity curves for assessment of tumor angiogenesis and patient survival. , 1998, Cancer research.

[38]  P. Tofts Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd‐DTPA MR imaging , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[39]  W. J. Lorenz,et al.  Pharmacokinetic Mapping of the Breast: A New Method for Dynamic MR Mammography , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[40]  J. Hogg Magnetic resonance imaging. , 1994, Journal of the Royal Naval Medical Service.

[41]  D Matthaei,et al.  Dynamic digital subtraction imaging using fast low-angle shot MR movie sequence. , 1986, Radiology.

[42]  C. Patlak,et al.  Graphical Evaluation of Blood-to-Brain Transfer Constants from Multiple-Time Uptake Data. Generalizations , 1985, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[43]  N. Lassen,et al.  Tracer kinetic methods in medical physiology , 1979 .