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 MTR
asym 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.