Xiaolei Song1,2, Yanrong Chen1,3, Chenwang Jin1,2, Tao Liu1,2, Chengyan Chu1,2, Yuguo Li1, Yue Yuan1,2, Xiaowei He3, Piotr Walczak1,2, and Jeff WM Bulte1,2
1Russell H. Morgan Dept. of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States, 2Cellular Imaging Section, Institute for Cell Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States, 3Dept. of Information Sciences and Technology, Northwest University, Xi'an, China
Synopsis
Sodium salicylate
(NaSA), a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug and the main metabolite of
aspirin, accumulates specifically in inflamed tissue. Since NaSA can be
detected with CEST-MRI at millimolar concentrations, we investigated the use of
NaSA-enhanced CEST MRI for in vivo mapping of brain inflammation,
induced by intracerebral injection of lipopolysaccharide in mice. NaSA-CEST
shows signal enhancement in the inflamed LPS-injected hemisphere, which was not
observed in two control groups. NaSA-CEST exhibits distinct signal kinetics and
enhanced regions from that of Gd-enhanced MRI, and shows correlations with
histological staining of inflammatory markers, indicating its potential as a
new platform for imaging neuroinflammation.
Introduction
Sodium salicylate (NaSA), a nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and the main metabolite of aspirin, accumulates
specifically in inflamed tissue [1], where it exerts analgesic, antipyretic,
and anti-inflammatory effects. We previously demonstrated that NaSA can
accumulate ex vivo in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-treated mouse brain
slices [2], and that NaSA can be detected with CEST-MRI at millimolar
concentrations [3]. NaSA accumulation is in the mM range in inflamed tissue in
rodents [1]; For man taking therapeutic dose of aspirin: ~150-300 mg/L (~1-2
mM) in plasma. Here, we investigated the use of NaSA-enhanced CEST MRI for in
vivo mapping of brain inflammation. Methods
Focal neuroinflammation
was induced by a unilateral intrastriatal injection of 2 ul of 5 mg/ml
lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in C57/Bl6 mice (n=8). For another group of sham mice,
saline was injected instead of LPS using the same surgical procedure. 24-48
hours later, mice underwent MR scans on a 11.7 T horizontal scanner, before and
after i.v. injection of 100 ul NaSA (100 mg/kg bw). A single-slice RARE sequence was used to acquire
pre- and post-NaSA injection
images, with a saturation frequency offset at 9.3 ppm (peak frequency for NaSA) and saturation B1
= 5.9 uT and Tsat = 2.5 sec. (TR / effective TE = 5500 ms / 4
ms with RARE factor = 16, in-plane resolution is 0.17 mm X 0. 23 mm with slice
thickness = 1.2 mm). The
dynamic NaSA-CEST signal at time-point t
was quantified by [S(+9.3ppm, t)-S(+9.3ppm,
0)]/S0. CEST Zspectra were also collected at both pre- or
post-injection of NaSA, with the offset frequency sweeping from 8.4 ppm to 10.8
ppm. At the end of MRI,
Gd-enhanced T1-w images were collected to verify the blood-brain-barrier (BBB)
status, using a RARE sequence (TR / effective TE = 800 ms / 5.6 ms with RARE
factor = 4). The enhanced region on both NaSA-CEST images and Gd-enhanced
images were defined by only including the voxels with higher intensity than the
averaged value of the brain in the slice except for the ventricles. Post-mortem
immunohistology was performed using H&E staining, microglia (anti-Iba1)
staining, and anti-COX1 staining.Results
For the group of
inflamed mice, the dynamic NaSA-CEST images exhibit more enhancement on the
LPS-injected ipsilateral sides compared to the non-injected contralateral side,
with the signal increasing from ~10 min post intravenous injection of NaSA (Fig.1
A, Fig.3 A). While the T2w image
showed signs of hemorrhage and edema and post-Gd T1w indicated areas of a
disrupted BBB, the NaSA-CEST images from 15 to 45 min were found to highlight
regions similar to the distribution of Iba1+ activated microglia (Fig.
1A). In contrast, sham mice showed much lower NaSA-CEST signal than those
in the inflamed group, indicating no inflammation as validated by
immunohistology (Fig. 1B). The vehicle group, with i.v. injection of saline
instead of NaSA, did not show NaSA-CEST enhancement either at the sites of
inflammation (Fig. 1C), indicating that the NaSA-CEST signals in Fig.1A is specifically from NaSA but
not tissue or LPS. The Z-spectra differences between pre-injection and ~40min
post-injection of NaSA further validated the observed peaks at ~9.3-9.6 ppm (Fig.
2A). When comparing the NaSA-CEST signals with immunohistology for five
different brain regions (enhanced region, cortex and striatum in the
LPS-injected side and their mirrored contralateral regions), both COX1 and Iba1
intensity correlated to the NaSA-CEST signal, with the later showing a slightly
higher R2 (Fig. 2B). We also compared NaSA-CEST for
inflammation with Gd-DCE for imaging BBB status, where they display distinct
signal kinetics (Fig.3 A&B) and enhanced regions (Fig.3 C). Briefly,
the dynamic NaSA-CEST signal keep increase until more than 1 hour post i.v.
injection of NaSA (n=8, Mean ± SEM), while Gd-DCE (B, n=5, Mean ± SEM)
rises very fast in the LPS-injected striatum with clear difference from the
contralateral stratum in < 5min post i.v. injection of Gd, and the signal
starts decaying after 20 min post-injection. The enhanced regions of these two
types of images also exhibited poor
shape correlation, with a correlation coefficient of 0.33 ± 0.07 (n=5,
Mean ± STD).Conclusion
NaSA-CEST MRI shows specific signal enhancement in
the inflamed LPS-injected hemisphere, which was not observed in two control groups,
which are the sham group and the vehicle group. NaSA-CEST MRI exhibits distinct
signal kinetics and enhanced regions from that of Gd-enhanced MRI, and also
shows correlations with histological staining of inflammatory markers,
indicating it could be used as a new platform for imaging of neuroinflammation.Acknowledgements
NIH R21EB020905, Johns Hopkins Dept. of Radiology Britestar awardReferences
[1] Rainsford,
K.D. et al., Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. 1981;250:180. [2] Schaffhauser M. et al., WMIC 2016. New York City, P2493111
[3] Song X. et al., J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 2016;36:1186.