Deborah K. Hill1,2, Andreas Heindl3, Daniel N. Rodrigues3, Øystein Størkersen2, Yinyin Yuan3, Siver A. Moestue 1,2, Martin O. Leach3, Tone F. Bathen1, David J. Collins3, and Matthew D. Blackledge3
1Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2St. Olavs University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway, 3The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Synopsis
An
increased ADC can imply reduced cellularity; DWI is considered a useful tool
for assessing tumour treatment response, although there is little validation of
this relationship in cancer. We compared ADC, cellularity, and extracellular porosity using
a transgenic adenocarcinoma of
the mouse prostate model. ADC values were derived from DWI data, and
cellularity was assessed from histology using novel visualisation and
segmentation tools. We investigated the relationship between extracellular
porosity and ADC, and validated our findings using cell segmentation analysis
of histology slides. This analysis is useful to inform on tissue cellularity
for cases where histology samples are not available.Background
Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) of tissues, derived
from diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI), are often linked with tissue cellularity
(number of cells per unit volume). In
cancer it is normally hypothesised that an increase in ADC gives evidence of reduced
cellularity, so DWI is considered a useful tool for assessing tumour response
to treatment [1], although there is still little validation of this relationship in
cancer. In this study ADC,
cellularity, and extracellular porosity were compared using a transgenic adenocarcinoma of the mouse prostate
(TRAMP) model. ADC values were derived from DWI data, and cellularity scores
were assessed from histology using novel visualisation and segmentation tools:
Polyzoomer [2] and CRImage [3]. Further, we investigated the relationship between
extracellular porosity and ADC, and validated our findings using cell
segmentation analysis of histology slides. This analysis may be useful to
inform on tissue cellularity for cases where histology samples are not
available.
Methods
Animals: An
initial study on TRAMP (n=3) and control (c57BL/6) (n=1) mice, taken from a
larger cohort, were imaged using MRI every 4 weeks from 8 weeks of age. TRAMP
mice were monitored for cancer onset using high-resolution T2-weighted
(HR T2W, in plane resolution 0.1x0.1mm2) images and ADC maps
obtained from DWI. Mice were terminated between 28-30 weeks of age or when
visual inspection of images indicated unacceptable tumour burden. Upon
sacrifice, the GU tract (prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder) was excised and
formalin-fixed for histological analysis (hematoxylin, eosin and saffron
staining (HES)). TRAMP prostates were classified according to the histology as
either well-differentiated adenocarcinoma or poorly differentiated carcinoma.
Imaging: MRI was
performed on a 7T Bruker Biospec magnet with an 86mm diameter volume resonator (transmission)
and a surface coil for reception. DWI
was performed using a multi-shot EPI sequence: TE=28.5ms, TR=3000ms,
averages=4, matrix size=128x128, slice thickness=1.0mm, in plane resolution
0.2x0.2mm2, and b-values=0, 100, 200, 400, 800 s/mm2 along
three orthogonal gradient orientations. ADC estimation was performed using least-squares,
mono-exponential fitting.
Histological Analysis: Formalin
fixed paraffin embedded samples were sectioned (slice thickness: 4μm) and HES
stained. Slides were digitized using a Hamamatsu NanoZoomer XR (Hamamatsu,
Japan) scanner (40x) and visualised using Polyzoomer (ICR, London, UK) (Fig. 1).
Each pixel in the high-resolution images represents 0.23µm. To compute
cellularity maps, HES stained
sections were analysed employing CRImage; the classifier was trained to define cellular
components as nucleus or artefact. Cellularity, C, was estimated by finding the
total number of nuclei in each pixel and dividing by the pixel area (Fig. 2). Extracellular tissue porosity, ε, was determined
from the cellularity by assuming a spherical cell size of fixed radius, r:
ε = 1-VC/VP ≈ 1-⅔·C·(2πr2) (1)
where
VC is the total cell volume within the pixel volume, VP,
r is the mean radius calculated from multiple
measurements from the HES samples (Fig.
3).
Statistical Analysis: Regions of Interest
(ROIs) differentiating between ventral prostate, dorsal prostate, and cancer
(where applicable) were drawn on the cellularity maps using histology images as
reference. Corresponding ROIs were drawn on b0 DW-MR images and transferred to
ADC maps. Mean and standard deviation of
cellularity and ADC derived from each region were compared on a scatter diagram
(Fig. 4). By equating the model of tortuosity derived
for ADC measurements [4] with Archie’s law for porous media [5] we fit the following
model using a linear least-squares approach:
ln(ε) = (1/2n)ln(ADC) – (1/2n)ln(Dfree)
(2)
where
Dfree is the diffusion coefficient of free water at body temperature
and n is a scaling constant.
Results and Discussion
Good registration was
attained between MRI and histology (
Fig. 1). CRImage successfully delineated nuclei (
Fig. 2, Polyzoomed image available [6]).
A plot of cellularity against ADC revealed a clustering of different tissue types
(
Fig. 4);
the relationship was investigated further by
plotting ln(ADC) against ln(extracellular porosity)
(
Fig. 5)
which showed an agreement between the model prediction
and experimental data. The fit of model (2) provided an estimate for the scaling
term of n = 3.69 ± 0.16, which in turn was used to estimate D
free = 2.7x10
-3 mm
2/s,
which is within the range expected by literature [7]. An additional consideration, however, is that we
have not accounted for the confounding effects of water exchange or flow on ADC
estimates.
Conclusion
Using CRImage for
automated segmentation and estimation of nuclear count demonstrated a
relationship between ADC value and cellularity in prostates from TRAMP and
control mice. Our approach suggests that DWI can inform on cellularity in cases
where it is not feasible to acquire tissue for histological examination.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge support
from the liaison Committee between the Central Norway Regional Health Authority
and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, CRUK in association
with MRC and Department of Health, NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedicine Research
Centre, and post-doctoral fellowship
funding by the NIHR. MRI was performed
at the MR Core Facility, NTNU, animals were housed at the Comparative Medicine
Core Facility, NTNU, and histology performed at the Cellular and Molecular
Imaging Core Facility, NTNU.References
[1] Padhani A. et al. JMRI 2014, [2] Polyzoomer is
developed by YuanLab, http://www.yuanlab.org, [3] Yuan Y. et al. Sci Transl Med. 2012, [4] Khanafer, K. and Vafai, K., Heat Mass Trans.,
2006, [5] Pfeuffer, J. et al. Mag
Reson. Imag. 1998., [6] http://bit.ly/1wZgW6y,
[7] Holz, M. et al. Phys. Chem. Chem.
Phys., 2000.