Assessment of repeatability and treatment response in early phase clinical trials using DCE-MRI: comparison of parametric analysis using MR- and CT-derived arterial input functions

Abstract

ObjectivesPharmacokinetic (PK) modelling of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) data requires a reliable measure of the arterial input function (AIF) to robustly characterise tumour vascular properties. This study compared repeatability and treatment-response effects of DCE-MRI-derived PK parameters using a population-averaged AIF and three patient-specific AIFs derived from pre-bolus MRI, DCE-MRI and dynamic contrast computed tomography (DC-CT) data.MethodsThe four approaches were compared in 13 patients with abdominal metastases. Baseline repeatability [Bland-Altman statistics; coefficient of variation (CoV)], cohort percentage change and p value (paired t test) and number of patients with significant DCE-MRI parameter change post-treatment (limits of agreement) were assessed.ResultsIndividual AIFs were obtained for all 13 patients with pre-bolus MRI and DC-CT-derived AIFs, but only 10/13 patients had AIFs measurable from DCE-MRI data. The best CoV (7.5 %) of the transfer coefficient between blood plasma and extravascular extracellular space (Ktrans) was obtained using a population-averaged AIF. All four AIF methods detected significant treatment changes: the most significant was the DC-CT-derived AIF. The population-based AIF was similar to or better than the pre-bolus and DCE-MRI-derived AIFs.ConclusionsA population-based AIF is the recommended approach for measuring cohort and individual effects since it has the best repeatability and none of the PK parameters derived using measured AIFs demonstrated an improvement in treatment sensitivity.Key Points• Pharmacokinetic modelling of DCE-MRI data requires a reliable measure of AIF.• Individual MRI-DCE-derived AIFs cannot reliably be extracted from patients.• All four AIF methods detected significant Ktranschanges after treatment.• A population-based AIF can be recommended for measuring cohort treatment responses in trials.

Functional imaging and circulating biomarkers of response to regorafenib in treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients in a prospective phase II study

“…In this study, we have evaluated DCE-MRI in a well-defined study population, thus minimising the bias that may result from patient heterogeneity. The selected DCE-MRI parameter threshold applied for patient stratification is based on both a prior knowledge of the measurement repeatability of our technique 29 and clinically validated endpoints of PFS and OS. To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study showing that KEF, a product of K trans and EF, can be used as a parameter of DCE-MRI with high clinical specificity.…”

Improved repeatability of dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI using the complex MRI signal to derive arterial input functions: a test‐retest study in prostate cancer patients

“…-50 Rata et al51 reported a lower wCV of 7.5% when using a population AIF in a group of patients with abdominal tumors. To improve the accuracy of TK estimation, the promising approach presented by Brynolfsson et al 52 could be used, where they showed with simulated data that the concentration values…”

Time‐resolved angiography with stochastic trajectories for dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI in head and neck cancer: Are pharmacokinetic parameters affected?

“…In practice, however, a population-based AIF is commonly used for measuring cohort and individual vascular parameters since the patient-specific repeatability is hampered by in-flow effects, nonlinear signal response, nonuniform B 1 field, pulsatile flow, and partial volume effects. 34 This approach was also adapted in this study. However, it is expected that higher temporal resolution achieved with TWIST could be beneficial in characterization of patient-specific AIF.…”