Quantitative assessment of amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear overhauser enhancement (NOE) imaging with extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) signals

II. Comparison of three EMR models and application to human brain glioma at 3 Tesla

Hye Young Heo, Yi Zhang, Shanshan Jiang, Dong Hoon Lee, Jinyuan Zhou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the use of three extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) methods to quantify amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE) signals in human glioma. Methods Eleven patients with high-grade glioma were scanned at 3 Tesla. aEMR2 (asymmetric magnetization-transfer or MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), sEMR2 (symmetric MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), and sEMR1 (symmetric MT model to fit one-sided, wide-offset data) were assessed. ZEMR and experimental data at 3.5 ppm and -3.5 ppm were subtracted to calculate the APT and NOE signals (APT# and NOE#), respectively. Results The aEMR2 and sEMR1 models provided quite similar APT# signals, while the sEMR2 provided somewhat lower APT# signals. The aEMR2 had an erroneous NOE# quantification. Calculated APT# signal intensities of glioma (∼4%), much larger than the values reported previously, were significantly higher than those of edema and normal tissue. Compared with normal tissue, gadolinium-enhancing tumor cores were consistently hyperintense on the APT# maps and slightly hypointense on the NOE# maps. Conclusion The sEMR1 model is the best choice for accurately quantifying APT and NOE signals. The APT-weighted hyperintensity in the tumor was dominated by the APT effect, and the MT asymmetry at 3.5 ppm is a reliable and valid metric for APT imaging of gliomas at 3T.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1630-1639
Number of pages10
JournalMagnetic Resonance in Medicine
Volume75
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2016

Fingerprint

Amides
Glioma
Protons
Brain
Gadolinium
Edema
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • APT
  • brain glioma
  • CEST
  • MT
  • NOE

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{79195b06bd2240158d3be0bf64c257e1,
title = "Quantitative assessment of amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear overhauser enhancement (NOE) imaging with extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) signals: II. Comparison of three EMR models and application to human brain glioma at 3 Tesla",
abstract = "Purpose To evaluate the use of three extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) methods to quantify amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE) signals in human glioma. Methods Eleven patients with high-grade glioma were scanned at 3 Tesla. aEMR2 (asymmetric magnetization-transfer or MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), sEMR2 (symmetric MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), and sEMR1 (symmetric MT model to fit one-sided, wide-offset data) were assessed. ZEMR and experimental data at 3.5 ppm and -3.5 ppm were subtracted to calculate the APT and NOE signals (APT# and NOE#), respectively. Results The aEMR2 and sEMR1 models provided quite similar APT# signals, while the sEMR2 provided somewhat lower APT# signals. The aEMR2 had an erroneous NOE# quantification. Calculated APT# signal intensities of glioma (∼4{\%}), much larger than the values reported previously, were significantly higher than those of edema and normal tissue. Compared with normal tissue, gadolinium-enhancing tumor cores were consistently hyperintense on the APT# maps and slightly hypointense on the NOE# maps. Conclusion The sEMR1 model is the best choice for accurately quantifying APT and NOE signals. The APT-weighted hyperintensity in the tumor was dominated by the APT effect, and the MT asymmetry at 3.5 ppm is a reliable and valid metric for APT imaging of gliomas at 3T.",
keywords = "APT, brain glioma, CEST, MT, NOE",
author = "Heo, {Hye Young} and Yi Zhang and Shanshan Jiang and Lee, {Dong Hoon} and Jinyuan Zhou",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/mrm.25795",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "75",
pages = "1630--1639",
journal = "Magnetic Resonance in Medicine",
issn = "0740-3194",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantitative assessment of amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear overhauser enhancement (NOE) imaging with extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) signals

T2 - II. Comparison of three EMR models and application to human brain glioma at 3 Tesla

AU - Heo, Hye Young

AU - Zhang, Yi

AU - Jiang, Shanshan

AU - Lee, Dong Hoon

AU - Zhou, Jinyuan

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - Purpose To evaluate the use of three extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) methods to quantify amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE) signals in human glioma. Methods Eleven patients with high-grade glioma were scanned at 3 Tesla. aEMR2 (asymmetric magnetization-transfer or MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), sEMR2 (symmetric MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), and sEMR1 (symmetric MT model to fit one-sided, wide-offset data) were assessed. ZEMR and experimental data at 3.5 ppm and -3.5 ppm were subtracted to calculate the APT and NOE signals (APT# and NOE#), respectively. Results The aEMR2 and sEMR1 models provided quite similar APT# signals, while the sEMR2 provided somewhat lower APT# signals. The aEMR2 had an erroneous NOE# quantification. Calculated APT# signal intensities of glioma (∼4%), much larger than the values reported previously, were significantly higher than those of edema and normal tissue. Compared with normal tissue, gadolinium-enhancing tumor cores were consistently hyperintense on the APT# maps and slightly hypointense on the NOE# maps. Conclusion The sEMR1 model is the best choice for accurately quantifying APT and NOE signals. The APT-weighted hyperintensity in the tumor was dominated by the APT effect, and the MT asymmetry at 3.5 ppm is a reliable and valid metric for APT imaging of gliomas at 3T.

AB - Purpose To evaluate the use of three extrapolated semisolid magnetization transfer reference (EMR) methods to quantify amide proton transfer (APT) and nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE) signals in human glioma. Methods Eleven patients with high-grade glioma were scanned at 3 Tesla. aEMR2 (asymmetric magnetization-transfer or MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), sEMR2 (symmetric MT model to fit two-sided, wide-offset data), and sEMR1 (symmetric MT model to fit one-sided, wide-offset data) were assessed. ZEMR and experimental data at 3.5 ppm and -3.5 ppm were subtracted to calculate the APT and NOE signals (APT# and NOE#), respectively. Results The aEMR2 and sEMR1 models provided quite similar APT# signals, while the sEMR2 provided somewhat lower APT# signals. The aEMR2 had an erroneous NOE# quantification. Calculated APT# signal intensities of glioma (∼4%), much larger than the values reported previously, were significantly higher than those of edema and normal tissue. Compared with normal tissue, gadolinium-enhancing tumor cores were consistently hyperintense on the APT# maps and slightly hypointense on the NOE# maps. Conclusion The sEMR1 model is the best choice for accurately quantifying APT and NOE signals. The APT-weighted hyperintensity in the tumor was dominated by the APT effect, and the MT asymmetry at 3.5 ppm is a reliable and valid metric for APT imaging of gliomas at 3T.

KW - APT

KW - brain glioma

KW - CEST

KW - MT

KW - NOE

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930327212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930327212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/mrm.25795

DO - 10.1002/mrm.25795

M3 - Article

VL - 75

SP - 1630

EP - 1639

JO - Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

JF - Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

SN - 0740-3194

IS - 4

ER -