Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print September 28, 2005, 10.1148/radiol.2372041638
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2372041638v1
237/2/492    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thoeny, H. C.
Right arrow Articles by Ni, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thoeny, H. C.
Right arrow Articles by Ni, Y.
(Radiology 2005;237:492-499.)
© RSNA, 2005


Experimental Studies

Effect of Vascular Targeting Agent in Rat Tumor Model: Dynamic Contrast-enhanced versus Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging1

Harriet C. Thoeny, MD, Frederik De Keyzer, MSc, Vincent Vandecaveye, MD, Feng Chen, MD, Xihe Sun, MD, Hilde Bosmans, PhD, Robert Hermans, MD, PhD, Eric K. Verbeken, MD, PhD, Chris Boesch, MD, PhD, Guy Marchal, MD, PhD, Willy Landuyt, PhD and Yicheng Ni, MD, PhD

1 From the Departments of Radiology (H.C.T., F.D.K., V.V., F.C., X.S., H.B., R.H., G.M., Y.N.) and Pathology (E.K.V.), University Hospitals Leuven, Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium; Departments of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (H.C.T.) and Clinical Research (C.B.), University Hospital of Bern, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland; and Laboratory of Experimental Radiobiology/LEO, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (W.L.). Received September 23, 2004; revision requested November 26; revision received January 12, 2005; accepted February 1. H.C.T. supported by a grant from the Bernese Cancer League and by the Kurt and Senta Hermann Foundation. Address correspondence to R.H. (e-mail: robert.hermans{at}uz.kuleuven.ac.be).

PURPOSE: To compare dynamic contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and diffusion-weighted MR imaging for noninvasive evaluation of early and late effects of a vascular targeting agent in a rat tumor model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee for animal care and use. Thirteen rats with one rhabdomyosarcoma in each flank (26 tumors) underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging and diffusion-weighted echo-planar imaging in a 1.5-T MR unit before intraperitoneal injection of combretastatin A4 phosphate and at early (1 and 6 hours) and later (2 and 9 days) follow-up examinations after the injection. Histopathologic examination was performed at each time point. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of each tumor was calculated separately on the basis of diffusion-weighted images obtained with low b gradient values (ADClow; b = 0, 50, and 100 sec/mm2) and high b gradient values (ADChigh; b = 500, 750, and 1000 sec/mm2). The difference between ADClow and ADChigh was used as a surrogate measure of tissue perfusion (ADClow – ADChigh = ADCperf). From the dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images, the volume transfer constant k and the initial slope of the contrast enhancement–time curve were calculated. For statistical analyses, a paired two-tailed Student t test and linear regression analysis were used.

RESULTS: Early after administration of combretastatin, all perfusion-related parameters (k, initial slope, and ADCperf) decreased significantly (P < .001); at 9 days after combretastatin administration, they increased significantly (P < .001). Changes in ADCperf were correlated with changes in k (R2 = 0.46, P < .001) and the initial slope (R2 = 0.67, P < .001).

CONCLUSION: Both dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and diffusion-weighted MR imaging allow monitoring of perfusion changes induced by vascular targeting agents in tumors. Diffusion-weighted imaging provides additional information about intratumoral cell viability versus necrosis after administration of combretastatin.

© RSNA, 2005




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
T. Persigehl, R. Bieker, L. Matuszewski, A. Wall, T. Kessler, H. Kooijman, N. Meier, W. Ebert, W. E. Berdel, W. Heindel, et al.
Antiangiogenic Tumor Treatment: Early Noninvasive Monitoring with USPIO-enhanced MR Imaging in Mice
Radiology, August 1, 2007; 244(2): 449 - 456.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
D.-M. Koh and D. J. Collins
Diffusion-Weighted MRI in the Body: Applications and Challenges in Oncology
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2007; 188(6): 1622 - 1635.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
D.-M. Koh, E. Scurr, D. Collins, B. Kanber, A. Norman, M. O. Leach, and J. E. Husband
Predicting Response of Colorectal Hepatic Metastasis: Value of Pretreatment Apparent Diffusion Coefficients
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2007; 188(4): 1001 - 1008.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2005 by the Radiological Society of North America.