Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Medical Physics and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Research article

Average arterial input function for quantitative dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of neck nodal metastases

Amita Shukla-Dave12*, Nancy Lee3, Hilda Stambuk2, Ya Wang1, Wei Huang12, Howard T Thaler4, Snehal G Patel5, Jatin P Shah5 and Jason A Koutcher126

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

2 Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

3 Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

4 Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

5 Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

6 Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Medical Physics 2009, 9:4  doi:10.1186/1756-6649-9-4

Published: 7 April 2009

Abstract

Background

The present study determines the feasibility of generating an average arterial input function (Avg-AIF) from a limited population of patients with neck nodal metastases to be used for pharmacokinetic modeling of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) data in clinical trials of larger populations.

Methods

Twenty patients (mean age 50 years [range 27–77 years]) with neck nodal metastases underwent pretreatment DCE-MRI studies with a temporal resolution of 3.75 to 7.5 sec on a 1.5T clinical MRI scanner. Eleven individual AIFs (Ind-AIFs) met the criteria of expected enhancement pattern and were used to generate Avg-AIF. Tofts model was used to calculate pharmacokinetic DCE-MRI parameters. Bland-Altman plots and paired Student t-tests were used to describe significant differences between the pharmacokinetic parameters obtained from individual and average AIFs.

Results

Ind-AIFs obtained from eleven patients were used to calculate the Avg-AIF. No overall significant difference (bias) was observed for the transfer constant (Ktrans) measured with Ind-AIFs compared to Avg-AIF (p = 0.20 for region-of-interest (ROI) analysis and p = 0.18 for histogram median analysis). Similarly, no overall significant difference was observed for interstitial fluid space volume fraction (ve) measured with Ind-AIFs compared to Avg-AIF (p = 0.48 for ROI analysis and p = 0.93 for histogram median analysis). However, the Bland-Altman plot suggests that as Ktrans increases, the Ind-AIF estimates tend to become proportionally higher than the Avg-AIF estimates.

Conclusion

We found no statistically significant overall bias in Ktrans or ve estimates derived from Avg-AIF, generated from a limited population, as compared with Ind-AIFs.

However, further study is needed to determine whether calibration is needed across the range of Ktrans. The Avg-AIF obtained from a limited population may be used for pharmacokinetic modeling of DCE-MRI data in larger population studies with neck nodal metastases. Further validation of the Avg-AIF approach with a larger population and in multiple regions is desirable.