Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 1/2020

01-01-2020 | Glioma | Magnetic Resonance

Repeatability of amide proton transfer–weighted signals in the brain according to clinical condition and anatomical location

Authors: Jung Bin Lee, Ji Eun Park, Seung Chai Jung, Youngheun Jo, Donghyun Kim, Ho Sung Kim, Choong-Gon Choi, Sang Joon Kim, Dong-Wha Kang

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate whether clinical condition, imaging session, and locations affect repeatability of amide proton transfer–weighted (APTw) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the brain.

Materials and methods

Three APTw MRI data sets were acquired, involving two intrasession scans and one intersession scan for 19 healthy, 15 glioma, and 12 acute stroke adult participants (mean age 53.8, 54.6, and 68.5, respectively) on a 3T MR scanner. The mean APTw signals from five locations in healthy brain (supratentorial and infratentorial locations) and from entire tumor and stroke lesions (supratentorial location) were calculated. The within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated for each clinical conditions, image sessions, and anatomic locations. Differences in APTw signals between sessions were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance.

Results

The ICC and wCV were 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91–0.99) and 16.1 (12.6–21.3) in glioma, 0.93 (0.82–0.98) and 15.0 (11.4–20.6) in stroke, and 0.84 (0.72–0.91) and 34.0 (28.7–41.0) in healthy brain. There were no significant differences in APTw signal between three sessions, irrespective of disease condition and location. The ICC and wCV were 0.85 (0.68–0.94) and 27.4 (21.8–35.6) in supratentorial, and 0.44 (− 0.18 to 0.76) and 32.7 (25.9 to 42.9) in infratentorial locations. There were significant differences in APTw signal between supra- (mean, 0.49%; 95% CI, 0.38–0.61) and infratentorial locations (1.09%, 0.98–1.20; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The repeatability of APTw signal was excellent in supratentorial locations, while it was poor in infratentorial locations due to severe B0 inhomogeneity and susceptibility which affects MTR asymmetry.

Key Points

• In supratentorial locations, APTw MRI showed excellent intrasession and intersession repeatability in brains of healthy controls and patients with glioma, as well as in stroke-affected regions.
• APTw MRI showed excellent repeatability in supratentorial locations, but poor repeatability in infratentorial locations.
• Considering poor repeatability in the infratentorial locations, the use of APTw MRI in longitudinal assessment in infratentorial locations is not indicated.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Ward KM, Aletras AH, Balaban RS (2000) A new class of contrast agents for MRI based on proton chemical exchange dependent saturation transfer (CEST). J Magn Reson 143:79–87CrossRef
2.
van Zijl PC, Yadav NN (2011) Chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST): what is in a name and what isn’t? Magn Reson Med 65:927–948CrossRef
3.
McMahon MT, Gilad AA, Zhou J, Sun PZ, Bulte JW, van Zijl PC (2006) Quantifying exchange rates in chemical exchange saturation transfer agents using the saturation time and saturation power dependencies of the magnetization transfer effect on the magnetic resonance imaging signal (QUEST and QUESP): pH calibration for poly‐L‐lysine and a starburst dendrimer. Magn Reson Med 55:836–847
4.
Harston GW, Tee YK, Blockley N et al (2014) Identifying the ischaemic penumbra using pH-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Brain 138:36–42
5.
Zhou J, Payen JF, Wilson DA, Traystman RJ, van Zijl PC (2003) Using the amide proton signals of intracellular proteins and peptides to detect pH effects in MRI. Nat Med 9:1085–1090
6.
Zhou J, Lal B, Wilson DA et al (2003) Amide proton transfer (APT) contrast for imaging of brain tumors. Magn Reson Med 50:1120–1126CrossRef
7.
Wu B, Warnock G, Zaiss M et al (2016) An overview of CEST MRI for non-MR physicists. An overview of CEST MRI for non-MR physicists. EJNMMI Phys 3:19
8.
Choi Y, Ahn S, Lee SK et al (2017) Amide proton transfer imaging to discriminate between low- and high-grade gliomas: added value to apparent diffusion coefficient and relative cerebral blood volume. Eur Radiol 27:3181–3189CrossRef
9.
Zhou J, Zhu H, Lim M et al (2013) Three-dimensional amide proton transfer MR imaging of gliomas: initial experience and comparison with gadolinium enhancement. J Magn Reson Imaging 38:1119–1128CrossRef
10.
Zhou J, Tryggestad E, Wen Z et al (2011) Differentiation between glioma and radiation necrosis using molecular magnetic resonance imaging of endogenous proteins and peptides. Nat Med 17:130CrossRef
11.
Wang M, Hong X, Chang CF et al (2015) Simultaneous detection and separation of hyperacute intracerebral hemorrhage and cerebral ischemia using amide proton transfer MRI. Magn Reson Med 74:42–50CrossRef
12.
Park JE, Kim HS, Park KJ, Kim SJ, Kim JH, Smith SA (2016) Pre- and posttreatment glioma: comparison of amide proton transfer imaging with MR spectroscopy for biomarkers of tumor proliferation. Radiology 278:514–523
13.
Park JE, Lee JY, Kim HS et al (2018) Amide proton transfer imaging seems to provide higher diagnostic performance in post-treatment high-grade gliomas than methionine positron emission tomography. Eur Radiol 28:3285–3295CrossRef
14.
Togao O, Hiwatashi A, Keupp J et al (2015) Scan–rescan reproducibility of parallel transmission based amide proton transfer imaging of brain tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:1346–1353CrossRef
15.
Sun PZ, Benner T, Kumar A, Sorensen AG (2008) Investigation of optimizing and translating pH-sensitive pulsed-chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) imaging to a 3T clinical scanner. Magn Reson Med 60:834–841
16.
Li S, Dardzinski BJ, Collins CM, Yang QX , Smith MB (1996) Three-dimensional mapping of the static magnetic field inside the human head. Magn Reson Med 36:705–714
17.
Sullivan DC, Obuchowski NA, Kessler LG et al (2015) Metrology standards for quantitative imaging biomarkers. Radiology 277:813–825CrossRef
18.
Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD et al (2007) The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol 114:97–109CrossRef
19.
Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G et al (2016) The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131:803–820CrossRef
20.
Togao O, Yoshiura T, Keupp J et al (2012) Effect of saturation pulse length on parallel transmission based amide proton transfer (APT) imaging of different brain tumor types. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 20:744
21.
Keupp J, Baltes C, Harvey PR, van den Brink J (2011) Parallel RF transmission based MRI technique for highly sensitive detection of amide proton transfer in the human brain at 3T. Proc Int Soc Magn Reson Med 19:710
22.
Eggers H, Brendel B, Duijndam A, Herigault G (2011) Dual-echo Dixon imaging with flexible choice of echo times. Magn Reson Med 65:96–107
23.
Xiang QS (2006) Two-point water-fat imaging with partially-opposed-phase (POP) acquisition: an asymmetric Dixon method. Magn Reson Med 56:572–584CrossRef
24.
Edwards S, Gong Q, Liu C et al (1999) Infratentorial atrophy on magnetic resonance imaging and disability in multiple sclerosis. Brain 122:291–301CrossRef
25.
Guivel-Scharen V, Sinnwell T, Wolff S, Balaban RS (1998) Detection of proton chemical exchange between metabolites and water in biological tissues. J Magn Reson 133:36–45
26.
Park JE, Han K, Sung YS et al (2017) Selection and reporting of statistical methods to assess reliability of a diagnostic test: conformity to recommended methods in a peer-reviewed journal. Korean J Radiol 18:888–897CrossRef
27.
Barnhart HX, Barboriak DP (2009) Applications of the repeatability of quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical analysis of repeat data sets. Transl Oncol 2:231–235CrossRef
28.
Sappakitkamjorn J, Niwitpong S-A (2013) Confidence intervals for the coefficients of variation with bounded parameters. Int J Math Comput Sci Eng 7:198–203
29.
Hallgren KA (2012) Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol 8:23CrossRef
30.
Jiang S, Zou T, Eberhart CG et al (2017) Predicting IDH mutation status in grade II gliomas using amide proton transfer-weighted (APTw) MRI. Magn Reson Med 78:1100–1109CrossRef
31.
Yu H, Lou H, Zou T et al (2017) Applying protein-based amide proton transfer MR imaging to distinguish solitary brain metastases from glioblastoma. Eur Radiol 27:4516–4524CrossRef
32.
Zhao X, Wen Z, Huang F, et al (2011) Saturation power dependence of amide proton transfer image contrasts in human brain tumors and strokes at 3 T. Magn Reson Med 66(4):1033–1041
33.
Park J, Kim H, Jung S et al (2017) Depiction of acute stroke using 3-tesla clinical amide proton transfer imaging: saturation time optimization using an in vivo rat stroke model, and a preliminary study in human. Investig Magn Reson Imaging 21:65–70CrossRef
34.
Zhou J, Blakeley JO, Hua J et al (2008) Practical data acquisition method for human brain tumor amide proton transfer (APT) imaging. Magn Reson Med 60:842–849CrossRef
35.
Jacobs MA, Horská A, Van Zijl PC, Barker PB (2001) Quantitative proton MR spectroscopic imaging of normal human cerebellum and brain stem. Magn Reson Med 46:699–705
36.
Schmidt H, Schwenzer NF, Gatidis S et al (2016) Systematic evaluation of amide proton chemical exchange saturation transfer at 3 T: effects of protein concentration, pH, and acquisition parameters. Invest Radiol 51:635–646CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Repeatability of amide proton transfer–weighted signals in the brain according to clinical condition and anatomical location
Authors
Jung Bin Lee
Ji Eun Park
Seung Chai Jung
Youngheun Jo
Donghyun Kim
Ho Sung Kim
Choong-Gon Choi
Sang Joon Kim
Dong-Wha Kang
Publication date
01-01-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06285-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

European Radiology 1/2020 Go to the issue

Magnetic Resonance

Compressed sensing MRI of different organs: ready for clinical daily practice?

Chest

Dose reduction and image quality improvement of chest radiography by using bone-suppression technique and low tube voltage: a phantom study

Breast

Interobserver variability and likelihood of malignancy for fifth edition BI-RADS MRI descriptors in non-mass breast lesions

Magnetic Resonance

Consensus report from the 8th International Forum for Liver Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Magnetic Resonance

MRI evidence of brain atrophy, white matter damage, and functional adaptive changes in patients with cervical spondylosis and prolonged spinal cord compression

Cardiac

Baseline LV ejection fraction by cardiac magnetic resonance and 2D echocardiography after ST-elevation myocardial infarction – influence of infarct location and prognostic impact