Abstract
Background
Dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging (DSC-MRI) could be helpful to separate true disease progression from pseudo-progression in brain metastases when assessing the need for retreatment. However, the selection of arterial input functions (AIFs) is not standardized for analysis, limiting its use for this application.
Purpose
To compare population-based AIFs, AIFs specific to each patient, and AIFs specific to every visit in the longitudinal follow-up of brain metastases.
Material and Methods
Longitudinal data were collected from eight patients before treatment (6 of 8 patients) and after treatment (6–17 visits). Imaging was performed using a 1.5-T MRI system. Lesions were segmented by subtracting precontrast images from postcontrast images. Cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and cerebral blood flow (rCBF) were computed, and Pearson's product moment correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate similarity of DSC parameters dependent on various AIF choices across time. AIF shape characteristics were compared. Parameter differences between white matter (WM) and gray matter (GM) were obtained to determine which AIF choice maximizes tissue differentiation.
Results
Although DSC parameters follow similar patterns in time, the various AIF selections cause large parameter variations with relative standard deviations of up to ±60%. AIFs sampled in one patient across sessions more similar in shape than AIFs sampled across patients. Estimates of rCBV based on scan-specific AIFs differentiated better between perfusion in WM and GM than patient-specific or population-based AIFs (P ≤ 0.02).
Conclusion
Results indicate that scan-specific AIFs are the best choice for DSC-MRI parameter estimations in the longitudinal follow-up of brain metastases.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
