Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology

David A. Hormuth, Anna G. Sorace, John Virostko, Richard G. Abramson, Zaver M Bhujwalla, Pedro Enriquez-Navas, Robert Gillies, John D. Hazle, Ralph P. Mason, C. Chad Quarles, Jared A. Weis, Jennifer G. Whisenant, Junzhong Xu, Thomas E. Yankeelov

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

The complexity of modern in vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods in oncology has dramatically changed in the last 10 years. The field has long since moved passed its (unparalleled) ability to form images with exquisite soft-tissue contrast and morphology, allowing for the enhanced identification of primary tumors and metastatic disease. Currently, it is not uncommon to acquire images related to blood flow, cellularity, and macromolecular content in the clinical setting. The acquisition of images related to metabolism, hypoxia, pH, and tissue stiffness are also becoming common. All of these techniques have had some component of their invention, development, refinement, validation, and initial applications in the preclinical setting using in vivo animal models of cancer. In this review, we discuss the genesis of quantitative MRI methods that have been successfully translated from preclinical research and developed into clinical applications. These include methods that interrogate perfusion, diffusion, pH, hypoxia, macromolecular content, and tissue mechanical properties for improving detection, staging, and response monitoring of cancer. For each of these techniques, we summarize the 1) underlying biological mechanism(s); 2) preclinical applications; 3) available repeatability and reproducibility data; 4) clinical applications; and 5) limitations of the technique. We conclude with a discussion of lessons learned from translating MRI methods from the preclinical to clinical setting, and a presentation of four fundamental problems in cancer imaging that, if solved, would result in a profound improvement in the lives of oncology patients. Level of Evidence: 5. Technical Efficacy: Stage 3. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Medical Oncology
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Neoplasms
Animal Models
Perfusion
Research
Hypoxia

Keywords

  • cancer
  • CEST
  • diffusion
  • elastography
  • MT
  • perfusion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Hormuth, D. A., Sorace, A. G., Virostko, J., Abramson, R. G., Bhujwalla, Z. M., Enriquez-Navas, P., ... Yankeelov, T. E. (2019). Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26731

Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology. / Hormuth, David A.; Sorace, Anna G.; Virostko, John; Abramson, Richard G.; Bhujwalla, Zaver M; Enriquez-Navas, Pedro; Gillies, Robert; Hazle, John D.; Mason, Ralph P.; Quarles, C. Chad; Weis, Jared A.; Whisenant, Jennifer G.; Xu, Junzhong; Yankeelov, Thomas E.

In: Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Hormuth, DA, Sorace, AG, Virostko, J, Abramson, RG, Bhujwalla, ZM, Enriquez-Navas, P, Gillies, R, Hazle, JD, Mason, RP, Quarles, CC, Weis, JA, Whisenant, JG, Xu, J & Yankeelov, TE 2019, 'Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology', Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26731
Hormuth, David A. ; Sorace, Anna G. ; Virostko, John ; Abramson, Richard G. ; Bhujwalla, Zaver M ; Enriquez-Navas, Pedro ; Gillies, Robert ; Hazle, John D. ; Mason, Ralph P. ; Quarles, C. Chad ; Weis, Jared A. ; Whisenant, Jennifer G. ; Xu, Junzhong ; Yankeelov, Thomas E. / Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology. In: Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2019.
@article{ccddeeca20a34603a1b9f585f79f2d3e,
title = "Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology",
abstract = "The complexity of modern in vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods in oncology has dramatically changed in the last 10 years. The field has long since moved passed its (unparalleled) ability to form images with exquisite soft-tissue contrast and morphology, allowing for the enhanced identification of primary tumors and metastatic disease. Currently, it is not uncommon to acquire images related to blood flow, cellularity, and macromolecular content in the clinical setting. The acquisition of images related to metabolism, hypoxia, pH, and tissue stiffness are also becoming common. All of these techniques have had some component of their invention, development, refinement, validation, and initial applications in the preclinical setting using in vivo animal models of cancer. In this review, we discuss the genesis of quantitative MRI methods that have been successfully translated from preclinical research and developed into clinical applications. These include methods that interrogate perfusion, diffusion, pH, hypoxia, macromolecular content, and tissue mechanical properties for improving detection, staging, and response monitoring of cancer. For each of these techniques, we summarize the 1) underlying biological mechanism(s); 2) preclinical applications; 3) available repeatability and reproducibility data; 4) clinical applications; and 5) limitations of the technique. We conclude with a discussion of lessons learned from translating MRI methods from the preclinical to clinical setting, and a presentation of four fundamental problems in cancer imaging that, if solved, would result in a profound improvement in the lives of oncology patients. Level of Evidence: 5. Technical Efficacy: Stage 3. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.",
keywords = "cancer, CEST, diffusion, elastography, MT, perfusion",
author = "Hormuth, {David A.} and Sorace, {Anna G.} and John Virostko and Abramson, {Richard G.} and Bhujwalla, {Zaver M} and Pedro Enriquez-Navas and Robert Gillies and Hazle, {John D.} and Mason, {Ralph P.} and Quarles, {C. Chad} and Weis, {Jared A.} and Whisenant, {Jennifer G.} and Junzhong Xu and Yankeelov, {Thomas E.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jmri.26731",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging",
issn = "1053-1807",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Translating preclinical MRI methods to clinical oncology

AU - Hormuth, David A.

AU - Sorace, Anna G.

AU - Virostko, John

AU - Abramson, Richard G.

AU - Bhujwalla, Zaver M

AU - Enriquez-Navas, Pedro

AU - Gillies, Robert

AU - Hazle, John D.

AU - Mason, Ralph P.

AU - Quarles, C. Chad

AU - Weis, Jared A.

AU - Whisenant, Jennifer G.

AU - Xu, Junzhong

AU - Yankeelov, Thomas E.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The complexity of modern in vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods in oncology has dramatically changed in the last 10 years. The field has long since moved passed its (unparalleled) ability to form images with exquisite soft-tissue contrast and morphology, allowing for the enhanced identification of primary tumors and metastatic disease. Currently, it is not uncommon to acquire images related to blood flow, cellularity, and macromolecular content in the clinical setting. The acquisition of images related to metabolism, hypoxia, pH, and tissue stiffness are also becoming common. All of these techniques have had some component of their invention, development, refinement, validation, and initial applications in the preclinical setting using in vivo animal models of cancer. In this review, we discuss the genesis of quantitative MRI methods that have been successfully translated from preclinical research and developed into clinical applications. These include methods that interrogate perfusion, diffusion, pH, hypoxia, macromolecular content, and tissue mechanical properties for improving detection, staging, and response monitoring of cancer. For each of these techniques, we summarize the 1) underlying biological mechanism(s); 2) preclinical applications; 3) available repeatability and reproducibility data; 4) clinical applications; and 5) limitations of the technique. We conclude with a discussion of lessons learned from translating MRI methods from the preclinical to clinical setting, and a presentation of four fundamental problems in cancer imaging that, if solved, would result in a profound improvement in the lives of oncology patients. Level of Evidence: 5. Technical Efficacy: Stage 3. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.

AB - The complexity of modern in vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods in oncology has dramatically changed in the last 10 years. The field has long since moved passed its (unparalleled) ability to form images with exquisite soft-tissue contrast and morphology, allowing for the enhanced identification of primary tumors and metastatic disease. Currently, it is not uncommon to acquire images related to blood flow, cellularity, and macromolecular content in the clinical setting. The acquisition of images related to metabolism, hypoxia, pH, and tissue stiffness are also becoming common. All of these techniques have had some component of their invention, development, refinement, validation, and initial applications in the preclinical setting using in vivo animal models of cancer. In this review, we discuss the genesis of quantitative MRI methods that have been successfully translated from preclinical research and developed into clinical applications. These include methods that interrogate perfusion, diffusion, pH, hypoxia, macromolecular content, and tissue mechanical properties for improving detection, staging, and response monitoring of cancer. For each of these techniques, we summarize the 1) underlying biological mechanism(s); 2) preclinical applications; 3) available repeatability and reproducibility data; 4) clinical applications; and 5) limitations of the technique. We conclude with a discussion of lessons learned from translating MRI methods from the preclinical to clinical setting, and a presentation of four fundamental problems in cancer imaging that, if solved, would result in a profound improvement in the lives of oncology patients. Level of Evidence: 5. Technical Efficacy: Stage 3. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.

KW - cancer

KW - CEST

KW - diffusion

KW - elastography

KW - MT

KW - perfusion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063642577&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063642577&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jmri.26731

DO - 10.1002/jmri.26731

M3 - Review article

JO - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

JF - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

SN - 1053-1807

ER -