Sandeep K Ganji1, Zhongxu An1, Vivek Tiwari1, Marco Pinho2, Edward Pan3, Bruce Mickey4, Elizabeth Maher5, and Changho Choi1
1Advanced Imaging Research Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 2Radiology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 3Neurology and Neurotherapeutic, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 4Neurological Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 5Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States
Synopsis
2-hydroxyglutarate
(2HG) has become an important biomarker in the diagnosis and management of
glioma patients as well as in the workup of an undiagnosed mass. The 1H
MRS signals of 2HG are extensively overlapped with other metabolite signals.
Specifically, uncertainty in 2HG evaluation arising from the spectral overlap
of the 2HG 2.25-ppm signal with the GABA 2.29-ppm resonance may be a major
obstacle when the 2HG level is relatively low. Here we report a novel
triple-refocusing difference editing that provides complete differentiation
between 2HG and GABA signals at 7T. PURPOSE
Mutations in isocitrate-dehyrogenase
(IDH1 and IDH2) are present in the majority of low grade gliomas and secondary
glioblastomas (~60-90%)
1 and are associated with longer patient
survival when compared to IDH wild-type tumors
2. The mutations impart
a functional gain and convert α-ketoglutarate to 2HG, resulting in substantial
elevation in 2HG levels. Precise measurement of 2HG is challenging largely due
to the interferences from the overlapping multiplets of glutamate (Glu),
glutamine (Gln), γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and macromolecule signals. The
purpose of the study was to develop a new 1H-MRS method that
overcomes the spectral challenges at 7T
in
vivo.
METHODS
Numerical simulations
of triple-refocusing difference/summing editing for separation between the
strongly-coupled 2.25-ppm resonance of 2HG and the weakly-coupled 2.29-ppm
resonance of GABA at 7T were performed incorporating the volume-localizing RF
and gradient pulses. A non-slice selective 180° pulse (E180) was implemented between
the two 180° pulses of PRESS (Fig. 1). A pair of subecho time-sets was searched
for, with numerical analyses, using the following criteria: 1) large 2HG
2.25-ppm signal via subtraction, 2) small GABA, Glu, and Gln signals via
subtraction, and 3) small 2HG signal via summing. Two subecho time sets were
obtained at a total TE of 90 ms; (t
1,t
2,t
3,t
4)=(20,17,25,28)
and (12,36,33,09)ms, both with a 12 ms long E180 tuned to 2.5 ppm (Fig. 1). Following phantom validation, the editing
method was tested in 5 patients with gliomas and 5 healthy volunteers. Data were
acquired with 32-channel head coil in a 7T whole-body scanner (Philips Medical
Systems). Voxel size was 4 – 8 mL depending on the tumor volume identified with
T2w-FLAIR. In healthy brain the voxel size was 14mL in gray-matter
and 9mL in white-matter region. Data acquisition parameters included TR=2.5s,
sweep-width=5kHz, number of sampling points=4096, and signal-averages = 64–256
for each subecho time set. Unsuppressed water data was acquired for eddy
current compensation and multi-channel combination. Spectral fitting was
performed with LCModel
3, using basis spectra
calculated incorporating the volume localizing RF and gradient pulses with
published chemical shift and J-coupling constants
4,5. Metabolite
quantification was performed using water as a reference at 42 M.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure-2 shows the
performance of the triple-refocusing difference editing. The 2HG signal at 2.25 ppm exhibited a positive
signal at subspectrum-A and an inverted signal in subspectrum-B, thereby
leading to a positive edited signal following subtraction and null signal
following summing. In contrast, the weakly-coupled GABA 2.29 ppm resonance was
a positive signal with similar amplitude in the subspectra, giving null and
edited signal following subtraction and summing, respectively. The Glu 2.35 pm
resonance was substantially attenuated in the difference spectrum, enhancing
the 2HG detection. Also at the optimized subecho times, the 2HG, GABA and Glu signals were much narrower than at short TE, offering
improved separation of the metabolite signals. Figure-3 presents the 2HG
signals from simulation and phantom (2HG 10mM and Gly 20mM), and in-vivo edited data from a glioma patient. In
consistent with simulation and phantom data, a signal was clearly discernible
at 2.25 ppm in the difference spectra, while the sum spectra showed null 2HG
signal. Figure-4(a) shows an in-vivo
editing result from a glioma patient. 2HG was measured at 4.4 mM, while Glu and
GABA where not measurable. Gln was estimated at 1.8 mM. Figure-4(b,c) shows in
vivo difference- and summing-edited spectra from five glioma patients. 2HG was
measurable in 4 tumors, with CRLBs < 15%, including a low 2HG concentration
case (0.6 mM, 13% CRLB). The performance of the summing editing, which was
designed for GABA detection, was test in healthy volunteers (Figure-5). In the
summing spectra from gray-matter dominant regions the GABA signal at 2.29 ppm
was clearly discernible. GABA was estimated to be 0.9 mM (CRLB 9%) and 0.4 mM (CRLB
11%) for gray- and white-matter regions, respectively, in good agreement with
prior studies
6.
CONCLUSION
We report a new triple-refocusing
difference-editing method for
in-vivo detection of 2HG in brain tumors at 7T,
which was designed for edited 2HG signal at 2.25 ppm and suppressed GABA signal
at 2.29 ppm, thereby leading to 2HG measurement with minimal GABA interference.
With additional benefits from macromolecule attenuation at the long TEs, the editing
method offers excellent detectability of 2HG when 2HG concentrations are low. Further
study will be required to evaluate the capability of the editing for detection
of both 2HG and GABA, which may be important for evaluating the tumor
malignancy and neuronal disruption such
as seizures in brain tumors.
Acknowledgements
This study was
supported by NIH CA184584 and CPRIT RP140021.References
1. Yan H, Parsons DW, Jin G, McLendon R, Rasheed BA, Yuan W, Kos I, Batinic-Haberle I, Jones S, Riggins GJ, Friedman H, Friedman A, Reardon D, Herndon J, Kinzler KW, Velculescu VE, Vogelstein B, Bigner DD. IDH1 and IDH2 Mutations in Gliomas. N Engl J Med 2009;360(8):765-773.
2. Christensen BC, Smith AA, Zheng S, Koestler DC, Houseman EA, Marsit CJ, Wiemels JL, Nelson HH, Karagas MR, Wrensch MR, Kelsey KT, Wiencke JK. DNA Methylation, Isocitrate Dehydrogenase Mutation, and Survival in Glioma. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2011;103(2):143-153.
3. Provencher SW. Estimation of metabolite concentrations from localized in vivo proton NMR spectra. Magn Reson Med 1993;30(6):672-679.
4. Bal D, Gryff-Keller A. 1H and 13C NMR study of 2-hydroxyglutaric acid and its lactone. Magn Reson Chem 2002;40(8):533-536.
5. Govindaraju V, Young K, Maudsley AA. Proton NMR chemical shifts and coupling constants for brain metabolites. NMR Biomed 2000;13(3):129-153.
6. Ganji SK, An Z, Banerjee A, Madan A, Hulsey KM, Choi C. Measurement of regional variation of GABA in the human brain by optimized point-resolved spectroscopy at 7 T in vivo. NMR Biomed 2014;27(10):1167-1175.