DCE MRI in Differential Diagnosis of Primary and Secondary Brain Tumors

Aim: the article is devoted to determine the capabilities of T1-dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in differentiation diagnosis primary and secondary brain tumors. Materials and methods. The analysis was based on data generated from MRI examinations using a T1-DCE protocol of 74 patients with intracerebral tumors: gliomas - 24 (32.4%) cases (glioblastoma - 17, astrocytoma - 5 and oligodendroglioma - 2), meningioma - 23 (31.1%) and metastases - 27 (36.5%) cases (melanoma - 8, breast cancer - 7 and lung cancer - 12). MRI was performed on 3,0-T scanner (Skyra, Siemens AG, Erlangen Germany) and included following sequences: a) routine sequences in axial direction before contrast agent injection (T1-SE, T2-SE, T2-FLAIR, DWI), b) T1-Vibe with two different flip angles and DCE-protocol, c) T1-VIBE in axial direction after contrast injection with 3D-reconstruction. Results. The highest average K^trans and V_e were observed in meningiomas (0.097 ± 0.019 min^-1 and 0.151 ± 0.017), the lowest in gliomas Grade I-II (0.022 ± 0.001 min^-1 and 0.029 ± 0.003). The highest average were in melanoma mts (1.14 ± 0.331 min^-1) and lowest - in breast cancer mts (0.063 ± 0.193 min^-1). Conclusion. DCE MRI - potentially perspective and demanding further studying method allowing to assume possibility of carrying out effective differential diagnostics of various brain tumors by a cumulative assessment of the pharmacokinetic parameters providing valuable information on hemodynamic and proliferative properties of tumor tissue.

Т1-динамическое контрастирование, магнитно-резонансная томография, перфузионная магнитно-резонансная томография, гемодинамические показатели, T1-dynamic contrast enhanced, magnetic resonance imaging, hemodynamic parameters, vascularity

1. Марченко С.В. Комплексное лечение злокачественных глиом полушарий большого мозга: Дис. … канд. мед. наук. СПб., 1997. 157 с.

2. Lamszus K. Meningioma pathology, genetics and biology. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 2004; 63: 275-286.

3. Dowd C.F., Halbach V.V., Higashida R.T. Meningiomas: the role of preoperative angiography and embolization. Neurosurg. Focus. 2003; 15 (1): E10.

4. Kim L.S., Huang S., Lu W. et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor expression promotes the growth of breast cancer brain metastases in nude mice. Clin. Exp. Metastasis. 2004; 21 (2): 107-118.

5. Siomin V., Vogelbaum M., Kanner A. et al. Posterior fossa metastases: risk of leptomeningeal disease when treated with stereotactic radiosurgery compared to surgery. J. Neurooncol. 2004; 67 (1-2): 115-121.

6. Brem S., Panattil J.G. An era of rapid advancement: diagnosis and treatment of metastatic brain cancer. Neurosurgery (Suppl.). 2005; 57 (5): 5-9.

7. Gavrilovic I.T., Posner J.B. Brain metastases: epidemiology and pathophysiology. J. Neurooncol. 2005; 75: 5-14.

8. Красовский Е.Б. Опухоли мозга и мозговых оболочек. В 2-х томах. Т. 2: Патологическая анатомия. М.: Московская правда, 1958. 720 с.

9. Мартынов Ю.С., Идрисова М.И. Поражение головного мозга при раке легких. Журнал невропатологии и психиатрии им. С.С. Корсакова. 1981; 11: 1601-1606.

10. Patchell R.A., Tibbs P.A., Walsh J.W. et al. A randomized trial of surgery in the treatment of single metastases to the brain. N. Engl. J. Med. 1990; 322: 494-500.

11. Holash J., Maisonpierre P.C., Compton D. et al. Vessel coop tion, regression, and growth in tumor mediated by angiopoietins and VEGF. Science. 1999; 284 (5422): 1994-1998.

12. Blouw B., Song H., Tihan T. et al. The hypoxic response of tumors is dependent on their microenvironment. Cancer Cell. 2003; 4: 133-146.

13. Baert A.L., Sartor K. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in oncology. Berlin etc.: Springer, 2005; 6: 81-92.

14. Долгушин М.Б. Нейровизуализация метастазов злокачественных опухолей в головном мозге и оценка эффективности их лечения: Автореф. дис. ... д-ра мед. наук. М., 2012. 24 с.

15. Blaschuk O.W., Rowlands T.M. Cadherins as modulators of angiogenesis and the structural integrity of blood vessels. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2000; 19 (1-2): 1-5.

16. Jackson A., Jayson G.C., Li K.L. et al. Reproducibility of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in newly presenting glioma. Br. J. Radiol. 2003; 76: 153-162.

17. Arnold S.M., Patchell R.A. Diagnosis and management of brain metastases. Hematol. Oncol. Clin. N. Am. 2001; 15: 1085-1107.

18. Roberts T.P. Physiologic measurements by contrastenhanced MR imaging: expectations and limitations. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 1997; 7: 82-90.

19. Hwang T., Close T., Grego J. et al. Predilection of brain metastasis in gray and white matter junction and vascular border zones. Cancer. 1996; 77: 1551-1555.

20. Leenders W., Kusters B., Pikkemaat J. Vascular endothelial growth factor-A determines detectability of experimental melanoma brain metastasis in GD-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Int. J. Cancer. 2003; 105 (4): 437-443.

21. Byrne T., Cascino T., Posner J. Brain metastasis from melanoma. J. Neurooncol. 1983; 1: 313-317.

22. Nussbaum E., Djalilian H., Cho K. et al. Brain metastases: histology, multiplicity, surgery, and survival. Cancer. 1996; 78: 1781-1788.

23. Tofts P.S., Brix G., Buckley D.L. et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI of a diffusible tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 1999; 10: 223-232.

24. Weidner N. Tumoral vascularity as a prognostic factor in cancer patients: the evidence continues to grow. J. Pathol. 1998; 184: 119-122.

25. Bisese J. MRI of cranial metastasis. Sem. Ultrasound CT MR. 1992; 13: 473-483.

26. Sugahara T., Korogi Y., Kochi M. et al. Perfusion-sensitive MR imaging of gliomas: comparison between gradientecho and spin echo echo-planar imaging techniques. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2001; 22: 1306-1315.

27. Pavelka M., Roth J. Funktionelle Ultrastruktur. Wien: Springer-Verlag, 2009: 234-235.

28. Plate K.H., Mennel H.D. Vascular morphology and angiogenesis in glial tumors. Exp. Toxicol. Pathol. 1995; 47: 89-94.

29. Fagerholm U. The highly permeable blood-brain barrier: an evaluation of current opinions about brain uptake capacity. Drug. Discov. Today. 2007; 12: 1076-1082.

30. Sims D.E. Diversity within pericytes. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol. 2000; 27: 842-846.

31. Shepro D., Morel N.M. Pericyte physiology. FASEB. 1993; 7: 1031-1038.

32. Jain R.K., di Tomaso E., Duda D.G. et al. Angiogenesis in brain tumours. Nat. Rev. Neurosci 2007; 8 (8): 610-622.

33. Chao H., Hirschi K.K. Hemato-vascular origins of endothelial progenitor cells? Microvasc. Res. 2010; 79: 169-173.

34. Dome B., Dobos J., Tovari J. et al. Circulating bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells: Characterization, mobilization, and therapeutic considerations in malignant disease. Cytometry A. 2008; 73: 186-193.

35. Monsky W.L., Mouta Carriera C., Tsuzuki Y. et al. Role of host microenvironment in angiogenesis and microvascular functions in human breast cancer xenografts: mammary fat pad versus cranial tumors. Clin. Cancer Res. 2002; 8: 1008-1013.

36. Kassner A., Thornhill R. Measurements the integrity of the human blood-brain barrier using magnetic resonance imaging. Methods Mol. Biol. 2011; 686: 229-245.

37. Ohno K., Pettigrew K.D., Rapopport S.I. Lower limits of cerebrovascular permeability to nonelectrolytes in the conscious rat. Am. J. Physiol. 1978; 235 (3): 299-307.

38. Paulson O.B., Hertz M.M. Tracer kinetics and physiologic modeling. In: Lambrecht R.M., Rescigno A (eds). Theory to practice. Lecture notes in biomathematics. Berlin; Heidelberg; New York: Springer, 1983: 429-444.

39. Larsson H.B., Stubgaard M., Frederiksen J.L. et al. Quantification of blood-brain barrier defect by magnetic resonance imaging and gadolinium-DTPA in patients with multiple sclerosis and brain tumors. Magn. Reson. Med. 1990; 16: 117-131.

40. Tofts P.S., Kermode A.G. Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn. Reson. Med. 1991; 17: 357-367.

41. Roberts H.C., Roberts T.P., Bollen A.W. et al. Correlation of microvascular permeability derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with histologic grade and tumor labeling index: a study in human brain tumors. Acad. Radiol. 2001; 8 (5): 384-391.

42. Haaron H.A., Buckley D.L. Patankar T.A. et al. A comparison of Ktrans measurements in gliomas obtained with convectional and first pass model. Proc. 10th Intern. Magn. Reson. Med. Hawaii. 2002a; 663.

43. Haaron H.A., Patankar T.A., Dow G. et al. Relationship between vascular endothelial permeability and histological grade in human gliomas using a novel first pass model. Proc 10th Intern. Magn. Reson. Med. Hawaii. 2002b; 2113.

44. Zhu X.P., Li K.L., Kamaly-Asl I.D. et al. Quantification of endothelial permeability, leakage space, and blood volume in brain tumors using combined T1 and T2* contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2000; 11: 575-585.

45. Long D.M. Vascular ultrastructure in human meningiomas and schwannomas. J. Neurosurg. 1973; 38: 409-419.

46. Andersen C., Jensen F.T. Differences in blood-tumourbarrier leakage of human intracranial tumours: quantificative monitoring of vasogenic oedema and its response to glucocorticoid treatment. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1998; 140: 919-924.

47. Johnson G.., Wetzel S., Cha S. et al. Simultaneous measurement of blood volume and vascular transfer constant by first pass pharmacokinetic modeling. Proc 10th Intern Magn. Reson. Med. Hawaii. 2002; 2123.