Parisa Movahedi1, Hanne Hakkarainen2, Harri Merisaari1, Heidi Liljenbäck1, Helena Virtanen1, Hannu Juhani Aronen1, Heikki Minn1, Matti Poutanen1, Anne Roivainen1, Timo Liimatainen2, and Ivan Jambor1
1University of Turku, Turku, Finland, 2A.I. Virtanen Institute for Molecular Sciences, Kuopio, Finland
Synopsis
Tumor growth in mice
preclinical prostate cancer model (human prostate cancer cells, PC-3) was
followed for 4 weeks by weekly DWI in control
group (n=10) and treatment group (n=9) receiving Docetaxel. DWI data sets were acquired using 15 b-values
in the range of 0-500s/mm2 and 12 b-values the range of 0-2000 s/mm2. The DWI
signal decays were fitted using monoexponential, biexponential, kurtosis and
stretched exponential models/functions. Bayesian shrinkage prior method and independent
least squares fitting have been applied and fitting quality evaluated by corrected
Akaike Information Criteria. Bayesian modeling improved quality of DWI
parametric maps derived using high b-value DWI data sets. Our result does not
support the use of biexponential, kurtosis and stretched exponential
models/functions for low b value DWI data sets of PC-3 mice
preclinical prostate cancer model.Purpose
To evaluate different
mathematical functions/models for DWI of mice preclinical prostate cancer model
(human prostate cancer cells, PC-3) using Bayesian shrinkage prior method and
independent least squares fitting.
Methods
One million PC-3 (Anticancer Inc., USA) human prostate cancer
cells were inoculated subcutaneously in immunodeficient mice (n=11, HSD:
Athymic Nude Foxn 1nu, Harlan Laboratories, Indianapolis, IN, USA). All animal
handling was conducted in accordance with the local ethics committee for the
use and care of laboratory animals and the institutional animal care policies,
which fully meet the requirements as defined in the U.S. National Institutes of
Health guidelines on animal experimentation. The mice were divided into 2
groups: 1. control group (n=10), 2. treatment group (n=9). The treatment group
received Docetaxel (Docetaxel, Actavis, Espoo, Finland) given once a week for
three weeks as i.p. injections. The dose
was 15mg/kg. Tumor growth in both of the groups was followed by weekly MRI
examinations performed using a 7T MR scanner (7T Pharmascan, Bruker GmbH,
Ettlingen, Germany) and a 72 mm volume transmitter (Bruker GmbH) and 10 mm
surface receiver coil (Bruker GmbH). Multislice T2-weighted anatomical images
covering the whole tumor area were obtained (TR/TE 2500 ms/33 ms, field of view
(FOV) = 30 × 30 mm2, matrix size 256 × 256, 15 slices) to localize a slice with
maximum tumor diameter for DWI measurements. Diffusion weighted single shot
spin-echo echo planar imaging was applied with the parameters: TR/TE 3750/25.3
(low b-value set) 3000/30 ms (high
b-value set), FOV 3 × 1.5 cm2, matrix 128
×64, slice thickness 1 mm, three orthogonal diffusion directions, and
two different sets of b-values: low b-value set (15 b-values in total): 0, 2,
4, 6, 9, 12, 14, 18, 23, 25, 28, 50, 100, 300, 500 s/mm2, and high
b-value set (12 b-values in total): 0, 100, 300, 500, 700, 900, 1100, 1300,
1500, 1700, 1900, 2000 s/mm2. For further analysis, the mean value
of the signal from three directions was calculated.
The following four
mathematical functions/models were applied to the DWI signal obtained using low
and high b-values:
1. Mono-exponential model (1):
$$S(b)=S_{0}e^{-bADC_{m}}$$ Eq.
1
2. Stretched exponential model (2):
$$S(b)=S_{0}e^{-bADC^{\alpha}}$$ Eq. 2
3. Kurtosis model (3):
$$S(b)=S_{0}(e^{-bADC_{k}+1/6b^{2}ADC_{k}^{2}K})$$
Eq. 3
4a. Bi-exponential model for low b-values (4):
$$S(b)=S_{0}(fe^{-bD_{p}}+(1-f)e^{-bD_{f}})$$ Eq. 4
4b. Bi-exponential model for high b-values (5):
$$S(b)=S_{0}(fe^{-bD_{f}}+(1-f)e^{-bD_{s}})$$ Eq. 5
The DWI signal
decay of each individual voxel has been fitted using four mathematical models,
as described above, to generate parametric maps of the parameters. The fitting
procedure has been performed using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm in Python
programming language and following multiple initialization values to prevent
local minima in the fitting procedure. Furthermore, all of the parameters
except of the Mono-exponential model’s parameter (ADCm) have been fitted by a
Bayesian shrinkage method (6). The Bayesian
shrinkage prior (BSP) model takes the estimated parameters from least squares
fit as a prior distribution of the region of interest, jointly estimating the
voxel-wise parameters based on the ROI distribution. The Markove chain
algorithm utilizing Gibbs sampling with Metropolis-Hastings updates for each
voxel parameters has been applied to each ROI to robustly and quickly converge
to the stationary distribution of each parameter.
The tumor area
was manually delineated on T2-weighted anatomical images and the regions of
interest (ROIs) were transferor to the corresponding parametric images.
Corrected Akaike information criteria difference (AICc) (7) was used to evaluate
fitting quality.
Results
The use of Bayesian
shrinkage method resulted in reduced parameter variation (Figure 1) and
smoother parametric maps (Figure 2) which could be attributed to reduced
estimation uncertainty of each model.
Bayesian shrinkage method resulted in approximately 20% and 40% increase
in root measure error of the least square fitting procedure in high and low
b-value data sets, respectively (Figure 3). In majority of voxels (above 50%)
stretched exponential, kurtosis and bi-exponential models fitted DWI data
obtained using high b-values better than the mono-exponential model based on
AICc (Figure 4). The kurtosis model was preferred over the stretched exponential
model in average in approximately ~70% of voxels. In contrast, stretched
exponential, kurtosis and bi-exponential models were not preferred over the
monoexponential model in DWI data obtained using low b-values (Figure 5).
Conclusion
Bayesian modeling improved
quality of DWI parametric maps derived using high b-value DWI data sets. Our
result does not support the use of biexponential, kurtosis and stretched
exponential models/functions for low b value DWI data sets of PC-3 mice
preclinical prostate cancer model.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Stejskal
EO. Use of spin echoes in a pulsed magnetic-field gradient to
study restricted diffusion and
flow. J Chem Phys 1965;43;3597–3603
2.
Kopf M, Corinth C, Haferkamp O,
Nonnenmacher TF. Anomalous diffusion of water in biological tissues. Biophys J
1996; 70:2950-2958.
3.
Jensen JH, Helpern JA. MRI
quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by kurtosis analysis. NMR Biomed
2010; 23:698-710.
4.
Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D,
Aubin ML, Vignaud J, Laval-Jeantet M. Separation of diffusion and perfusion in
intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 1988; 168:497-505.
5.
Mulkern RV, Gudbjartsson H, Westin
CF, et al. Multi-component apparent diffusion coefficients in human brain. NMR
Biomed 1999; 12:51-62.
6.
Orton MR, Collins DJ, Koh DM, Leach
MO. Improved intravoxel incoherent motion analysis of diffusion weighted
imaging by data driven Bayesian modeling. Magn Reson Med 2014; 71:411-420.
7.
Akaike H. Information theory as an
extension of the maximum likelyhood
principle. In: Petrov BN, Csaki F,
editors. Second International Symposium on Information Theory. Budapest:
Akademiai Kaido; 1973. p 267–281.