Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a non-invasive method to evaluate significant differences between malignant and normal tissue.

PURPOSE An ever recurring challenge in diagnostic radiology is the differentiation between non-malignant and malignant tissue. Based on evidence that microcirculation of normal, non-malignant tissue differs from that of malignant tissue, the goal of this study was to assess the reliability of dynamic contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (dcMRI) for differentiating these two entities. MATERIALS AND METHODS DcMRI data of rectum carcinoma and gluteus maximus muscles were acquired in 41 patients. Using an fast T1-mapping sequence on a 1.5-T whole body scanner, T1-maps were dynamically retrieved before, during and after constant rate i.v. infusion of a contrast medium (CM). On the basis of the acquired data sets, PI-values were calculated on a pixel-by-pixel basis. The relevance of spatial heterogeneities of microcirculation was investigated by relative frequency histograms of the PI-values. RESULTS A statistically significant difference between malignant and normal tissue was found for the mean PI-value (P < 0.001; 8.95 ml/min/100 g +/- 2.45 versus 3.56 ml/min/100 g +/- 1.20). Additionally relative frequency distributions of PI-values with equal class intervals of 2.5 ml/min/100 g revealed significant differences between the histograms of muscles and rectum carcinoma. CONCLUSION We could show that microcirculation differences between malignant and normal, non-malignant tissue can be reliably assessed by non-invasive dcMRI. Therefore, dcMRI holds great promise in the aid of cancer assessment, especially in patients where biopsy is contraindicated.

[1]  M. Bahner,et al.  Regional blood flow, capillary permeability, and compartmental volumes: measurement with dynamic CT--initial experience. , 1999, Radiology.

[2]  J. Thrall,et al.  Tumor blood flow and systemic shunting in patients receiving intraarterial chemotherapy for head and neck cancer. , 1986, Cancer research.

[3]  D. McDonald,et al.  Significance of blood vessel leakiness in cancer. , 2002, Cancer research.

[4]  A M Peters,et al.  Noninvasive measurement of blood flow and extraction fraction. , 1987, Nuclear medicine communications.

[5]  G Brix,et al.  Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[6]  Y. D. Deene,et al.  Static, Dynamic and First-Pass MR Imaging of Musculoskeletal Lesions Using Gadodiamide Injection , 1995, Acta radiologica.

[7]  C Kremser,et al.  Monitoring of tumor microcirculation during fractionated radiation therapy in patients with rectal carcinoma: preliminary results and implications for therapy. , 2000, Radiology.

[8]  R Deichmann,et al.  Quantification of T1 values by SNAPSHOT-FLASH NMR imaging , 1992 .

[9]  G Brix,et al.  Tumor microcirculation evaluated by dynamic magnetic resonance imaging predicts therapy outcome for primary rectal carcinoma. , 2001, Cancer research.

[10]  D. Silbergeld,et al.  Isolation and characterization of microvessels from normal brain and brain tumors , 1991, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[11]  K. Miles,et al.  Measurement of tissue perfusion by dynamic computed tomography. , 1991, The British journal of radiology.

[12]  J. Logue,et al.  Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression is a prognostic factor for radiotherapy outcome in advanced carcinoma of the cervix , 2000, British Journal of Cancer.

[13]  J. Lindner Evolving applications for contrast ultrasound. , 2002, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  P. Choyke,et al.  Imaging of angiogenesis: from microscope to clinic , 2003, Nature Medicine.

[15]  R. Deichmann,et al.  Fast T1 mapping on a whole‐body scanner , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[16]  Y. Sakamoto,et al.  MR Gd-DTPA enhancement of radiation brain injury. , 1992, Radiation medicine.

[17]  J C Ehrhardt,et al.  Tumor perfusion studies using fast magnetic resonance imaging technique in advanced cervical cancer: a new noninvasive predictive assay. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  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.

[19]  R K Jain,et al.  Determinants of tumor blood flow: a review. , 1988, Cancer research.

[20]  H. van Essen,et al.  Angiogenic potential of malignant and non‐malignant human breast tissues in an in vivo angiogenesis model , 1998, International journal of cancer.

[21]  P. Hutzler,et al.  Lectin Intravital Perfusion Studies in Tumor-bearing Mice: Micrometer-resolution, Wide-area Mapping of Microvascular Labeling, Distinguishing Efficiently and Inefficiently Perfused Microregions in the Tumor , 1998, The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society.

[22]  Simon R Cherry,et al.  Complementary emerging techniques: high-resolution PET and MRI , 2001, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[23]  G. Bergman,et al.  Gadolinium-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of musculoskeletal infectious processes , 1995, Skeletal radiology.

[24]  N. Weidner,et al.  Tumoural vascularity as a prognostic factor in cancer patients: the evidence continues to grow , 1998, The Journal of pathology.