Premium
WE‐FG‐206‐06: Dual‐Input Tracer Kinetic Modeling and Its Analog Implementation for Dynamic Contrast‐Enhanced (DCE‐) MRI of Malignant Mesothelioma (MPM)
Author(s) -
Lee S,
Rimner A,
Hayes S,
Hunt M,
Deasy J,
Zauderer M,
Rusch V,
Tyagi N
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4957936
Subject(s) - nuclear medicine , dynamic contrast enhanced mri , blood flow , tracer , biomedical engineering , nuclear magnetic resonance , medicine , magnetic resonance imaging , radiology , physics , nuclear physics
Purpose: To use dual‐input tracer kinetic modeling of the lung for mapping spatial heterogeneity of various kinetic parameters in malignant MPM Methods: Six MPM patients received DCE‐MRI as part of their radiation therapy simulation scan. 5 patients had the epitheloid subtype of MPM, while one was biphasic. A 3D fast‐field echo sequence with TR/TE/Flip angle of 3.62ms/1.69ms/15° was used for DCE‐MRI acquisition. The scan was collected for 5 minutes with a temporal resolution of 5ߝ9 seconds depending on the spatial extent of the tumor. A principal component analysis‐based groupwise deformable registration was used to co‐register all the DCE‐MRI series for motion compensation. All the images were analyzed using five different dual‐input tracer kinetic models implemented in analog continuous‐time formalism: the Tofts‐Kety (TK), extended TK (ETK), two compartment exchange (2CX), adiabatic approximation to the tissue homogeneity (AATH), and distributed parameter (DP) models. The following parameters were computed for each model: total blood flow (BF), pulmonary flow fraction (γ), pulmonary blood flow (BF_pa), systemic blood flow (BF_a), blood volume (BV), mean transit time (MTT), permeability‐surface area product (PS), fractional interstitial volume (vi), extraction fraction (E), volume transfer constant (Ktrans) and efflux rate constant (kep). Results: Although the majority of patients had epitheloid histologies, kinetic parameter values varied across different models. One patient showed a higher total BF value in all models among the epitheloid histologies, although the γ value was varying among these different models. In one tumor with a large area of necrosis, the TK and ETK models showed higher E, Ktrans, and kep values and lower interstitial volume as compared to AATH and DP and 2CX models. Kinetic parameters such as BF_pa, BF_a, PS, Ktrans values were higher in surviving group compared to non‐surviving group across most models. Conclusion: Dual‐input tracer kinetic modeling is feasible in determining micro‐vascular characteristics of MPM. This project was supported from Cycle for Survival and MSK Imaging and radiation science (IMRAS) grants