CEST-mDixon for Breast Lesion Characterization at 3T
Shu Zhang1, Stephen Seiler1, Ananth Madhuranthakam1,2, Jochen Keupp3, Ivan E Dimitrov2,4, Robert E Lenkinski1,2, and Elena Vinogradov1,2

1Radiology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 2Advanced Imaging Research Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 3Philips Research, Hamburg, Germany, 4Philips Medical Systems, Cleveland, OH, United States

Synopsis

In this work, the feasibility of mDixon-based CEST-MRI for breast lesions characterization at 3T was explored. The mDixon technique was used to acquire pure water CEST images without fat contamination. The B0 maps derived from mDixon technique were used for field inhomogeneity correction. Human studies demonstrated marked differences in MTRasym between malignant and healthy tissue in hydroxyl range (0.8-1.8 ppm) and amide range (3.1-4.1 ppm). In addition, the width of the Z-spectrum was reduced in malignant vs healthy breast tissue. The results suggest that the CEST-mDixon has the potential as a robust detection and characterization tool of breast malignancy.

Introduction

CEST, specifically APT neuroimaging, is emerging as a powerful tool in assessment and characterization of tumor aggressiveness and treatment response1,2. Recent studies have demonstrated application of CEST to breast malignancies and several characteristic frequencies were proposed3-5. One of the difficulties of CEST-MRI in breast is the large fat content, leading to lipid artifacts and potentially degradation of the CEST effect.

We hypothesize that CEST-MRI can provide metabolic information6 to aid tumor characterization for enhanced specificity and predictive value of MR mammography. To remove lipid artifacts, the previously proposed CEST-mDixon method7,8 is used to obtain pure water CEST images. The mDixon technique is insensitive to B0 and B1 inhomogeneity and does not interfere with the saturation pulse train. Moreover, the B0 maps derived from the mDixon technique can be used for field inhomogeneity correction, without the need for a separate B0 mapping. The purpose of this work is to explore the potential of mDixon-based CEST-MRI for breast lesions characterization and identify the CEST frequency ranges with the highest correlation with malignancy, without fat contamination.

Methods

Four female volunteers, 1 healthy and 3 breast cancer patients prior to biopsy, were scanned on a 3T MRI (Ingenia, Philips Healthcare) using a 16-channel breast coil. CEST images were acquired using a 2D multi-shot T1-weighted turbo field echo (TFE) sequence with 3-point multi-echo Dixon with TR/TE1/ΔTE = 5.1/1.57/1.0 ms. We have chosen 3 TE values, since this is the least number of echoes needed to robustly separate water, fat, and B0. ΔTE was adjusted to the minimum possible value thus reducing potential artifacts by phase-wrapping. The imaging slice was placed for optimal observation of the fibroglandular tissue and/or the tumor. The CEST saturation pulse train consisted of 10 hyperbolic secant pulses, 49.5 ms each, with inter-pulse delay 0.5 ms and FA=900o (B1rms=1.2 μT). 33 points in the Z-spectrum from -6 ppm to 6 ppm were acquired. Other imaging parameters included centric ordering, voxel size=2*2*5 mm, FA=10o; SENSE=4, TFE factor=14 for two volunteers; SENSE=2, TFE factor=14 for one volunteer; and no SENSE, TFE factor=25 for one volunteer.

After mDixon fat/water separation, water-only images were processed on a pixel-by-pixel basis using custom Matlab routines. Water, fat images and B0 maps were obtained for each saturation frequency offset. Field inhomogeneity was corrected using an averaged B0 map from all frequency offsets. CEST maps were generated by integrating MTRasym in 4 ranges: (i) 0.8-1.2 ppm, (ii) 1.0-1.4 ppm, (iii) 1.2-1.8 ppm and (iv) 3.1-4.1 ppm. The first three ranges are for hydroxyl groups3,5,6 and the last is for amide groups4. Several ROIs were placed manually on normal and/or malignant tissues. The malignant regions were identified by a radiologist and confirmed by US-guided biopsy performed after the MRI scans. The Z-spectra were calculated for each ROI.

Results and Discussion

Representative images and Z-spectra of the healthy volunteer and a patient volunteer are shown in Fig.1. The malignant tissue displays higher CEST effect than the healthy tissue in all four frequency ranges investigated (Fig.2), with MTRasym reaching 11% in malignancy in all three hydroxyl ranges and 5% in the amide range. In malignancy, MTRasym in all the three hydroxyl ranges is higher than the MTRasym in the amide range, however with larger deviation across patients. By contrast, MTRasym across all hydroxyl ranges in the healthy tissue display lower effect than in the amide range (with larger deviation too). Hence the MTRasym difference between the malignant and the healthy tissues is larger in the hydroxyl range (0.8-1.8 ppm) than in the amide range (3.1-4.1 ppm). Interestingly, the Z-spectrum of the malignancy is narrower than in the healthy tissue, as is evident in Fig.1 and further explored in Fig.3.

Overall, the CEST-mDixon sequence is very robust and in most cases, water-fat decomposition leads to homogenous fat removal in the water-only images. We are investigating whether acquiring more echo points will help eliminating the residual artifacts still observed in the areas with large B0 deviations.

Conclusion

Our human studies demonstrated marked differences in MTRasym and the width of the z-spectrum in healthy vs. malignant breast tissues. The results suggest that the mDixon-based CEST-MRI has the potential as a robust detection and characterization tool of breast malignancy. Additional work on the delineation of the origins of various CEST signatures, as well as correlation of CEST contrast with different breast tumor types, aggressiveness, and biochemical markers is ongoing.

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

[1] Jones CK, et al. MRM 2006; 56:585-592. [2] Zhou J, et al. Nat Med 2011; 17:130-134. [3] Schmitt B, et al. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:S144-S146. [4] Dula AN, et al. MRM 2013; 70:216-224. [5] Wijnen JP, et al. Proc ISMRM 2012; 20:1544. [6] Song X, et al. Nat Commun 2015; 6. [7] Keupp J, et al. Proc ISMRM 2010; 18:338. [8] Jia G, et al. Proc ISMRM 2012; 20:3373.

Figures

Figure 1. Representative mDixon images and Z-spectra of the healthy volunteer (a-c) and a patient volunteer (d-f). The water-only images (a,d) with the ROIs (red=carcinoma; blue=normal) for the Z-spectra (c,f). The overlaid CEST maps (b,e) in the range of 0.8-1.2 ppm, as indicated by the gray dashed lines in (c,f).

Figure 2. MTRasym averaged in four CEST ranges across all the volunteers.

Figure 3. The full width at half maximum (FWHM) at SZ/S0 = 0.5 of the Z-spectrum averaged across all the volunteers.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
2894