Low-dose gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI of the kidney for the differential diagnosis of localized renal lesions

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for characterizing renal tumors: A validation study of the algorithm presented by Cornelis et al

Objectives

In the last decade, the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been rising, with the greatest increase observed for solid tumors. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols and algorithms have recently been available for classifying RCC subtypes and benign subtypes. The objective of this study was to prospectively validate the MRI algorithm presented by Cornelis et al. for RCC classification.

Material and Methods

Over a 7-month period, 38 patients with 44 renal tumors were prospectively included in the study and received an MRI examination in addition to the conventional investigation program. The MRI sequences were: T2-weighted, dual chemical shift MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted in wash-in and wash-out phases. The images were evaluated according to the algorithm by two experienced, blinded radiologists, and the histopathological diagnosis served as the gold standard.

Results

Of 44 tumors in 38 patients, only 8 tumors (18.2%) received the same MRI diagnosis according to the algorithm as the histopathological diagnosis. MRI diagnosed 16 angiomyolipoma, 14 clear cell RCC (ccRCC), 12 chromophobe RCC (chRCC), and two papillary RCC (pRCC), while histopathological examination diagnosed 24 ccRCC, four pRCC, one chRCC, and one mixed tumor of both pRCC and chRCC. Malignant tumors were statistically significantly larger than the benign (3.16 ± 1.34 cm vs. 2.00 ± 1.04 cm, P = 0.006).

Conclusion

This prospective study could not reproduce Cornelis et al.'s results and does not support differentiating renal masses using multiparametric MRI without percutaneous biopsy in the future. The MRI algorithm showed few promising results to categorize renal tumors, indicating histopathology for clinical decisions and follow-up regimes of renal masses are still required.

Comparison of DCE-MRI of murine model cancers with a low dose and high dose of contrast agent

There are increasing concerns regarding intracellular accumulation of gadolinium (Gd) after multiple dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI scans. We investigated whether a low dose (LD) of Gd-based contrast agent is as effective as a high dose (HD) for quantitative analysis of DCE-MRI data, and evaluated the use of a split dose protocol to obtain new diagnostic parameters. Female C3H mice (n = 6) were injected with mammary carcinoma cells in the hind leg. MRI experiments were performed on 9.4 T scanner. DCE-MRI data were acquired with 1.5 s temporal resolution before and after a LD (0.04 mmol/kg), then again after 30 min followed by a HD (0.2 mmol/kg) bolus injection of Omniscan. The standard Tofts model was used to extract physiological parameters (K^trans and v_e) with the arterial input function derived from muscle reference tissue. In addition, an empirical mathematical model was used to characterize maximum contrast agent uptake (A), contrast agent uptake rate (α) and washout rate (β and γ). There were moderate to strong correlations (r = 0.69-0.97, p < 0001) for parameters K^trans, v_e, A, α and β from LD versus HD data. On average, tumor parameters obtained from LD data were significantly larger (p < 0.05) than those from HD data. The parameter ratios, K^trans, v_e, A and α calculated from the LD data divided by the HD data, were all significantly larger than 1.0 (p < 0.003) for tumor. T₂* changes following contrast agent injection affected parameters calculated from HD data, but this was not the case for LD data. The results suggest that quantitative analysis of LD data may be at least as effective for cancer characterization as quantitative analysis of HD data. In addition, the combination of parameters from two different doses may provide useful diagnostic information.

Clinicopathologic analysis of renal cell carcinoma containing Intratumoral fat with and without osseous metaplasia

BACKGROUND

There is minimal information regarding the prevalence of intratumoral adipose in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and no study has assessed the impact of intratumoral adipose on the preoperative imaging diagnosis. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and histopathologic characteristics of entrapped adipose with or without osseous metaplasia in RCC nephrectomy specimens and to determine if this finding impacted the preoperative imaging interpretation.

METHODS

704 RCC specimens were prospectively evaluated for entrapped adipose and osseous metaplasia (423 partial nephrectomies, 281 total nephrectomies; 327 pT1a, 377 ≥ pT1b; 510 clear cell, 119 papillary, 30 chromophobe, 22 clear cell papillary, 23 other). Imaging reports were obtained, and the presence of intratumoral fat or calcification and the radiologic diagnostic impression were recorded.

RESULTS

3% (n = 21) contained microscopically identified intratumoral adipose, with a similar frequency in the main histologic subtypes (p = 0.76). Mean metaplastic deposit size was 0.4 cm, mean deposit to capsule distance 0.2 cm, and 29% involved the tumor capsule. Histologically identified adipose was infrequently noted via imaging (13%), and only 1 case with histologically identified metaplasia had a radiologic diagnostic differential of angiomyolipoma (1/704, 0.1%).

CONCLUSION

While intratumoral adipose and/or osseous metaplasia can be observed within RCC, it is extremely rare for the radiologic diagnostic impression to have been confounded by histologically identified entrapped adipose. Awareness that metaplastic deposits are usually near the tumor capsule and may be minute could help prevent errors in diagnosis or staging.

Effectiveness of a high relaxivity contrast agent administered at half dose in dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI of brain gliomas

PURPOSE

To determine whether half of the approved dose of gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance) is as effective as a full dose of gadoterate meglumine (Dotarem) for qualitative and quantitative cerebral blood volume (CBV) perfusion evaluation at 3T in patients with brain gliomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 65 adult patients in an interindividual comparative study. Patients were randomized to one of two study arms: 33 patients received 0.1 mmol/kg body weight (bw) of gadoterate, 32 patients received 0.05 mmol/kg bw of gadobenate. The patients underwent identical examinations at 3T. Arterial input function (AIF), tissue function (TF), and the maximum tumor CBV (CBV_T) were obtained from each patient. The quality of the CBV maps were independently reviewed by two neuroradiologists blinded to the administered contrast agent.

RESULTS

The administration of a half dose of gadobenate led to a roughly 40% reduction in signal drop compared to that achieved with a full dose of gadoterate (P values for AIF and TF maximum and integral were <0.01); quantitative and qualitative assessment of CBV maps revealed no difference between contrast agents (P values for CBV_T of high- and low-grade gliomas, image quality evaluation were 0.87, 0.48, >0.65, respectively) CONCLUSION: The CBV maps obtained with a half dose gadobenate (0.05 mmol/kg bw) are of comparable diagnostic quality as the corresponding images acquired with a full dose of gadoterate (0.1 mmol/kg bw).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;45:500-506.

The Benefits of High Relaxivity for Brain Tumor Imaging: Results of a Multicenter Intraindividual Crossover Comparison of Gadobenate Dimeglumine with Gadoterate Meglumine (The BENEFIT Study)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance) has higher r1 relaxivity than gadoterate meglumine (Dotarem) which may permit the use of lower doses for MR imaging applications. Our aim was to compare 0.1- and 0.05-mmol/kg body weight gadobenate with 0.1-mmol/kg body weight gadoterate for MR imaging assessment of brain tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed crossover, intraindividual comparison of 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate with 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate (Arm 1) and 0.05-mmol/kg gadobenate with 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate (Arm 2). Adult patients with suspected or known brain tumors were randomized to Arm 1 (70 patients) or Arm 2 (107 patients) and underwent 2 identical examinations at 1.5 T. The agents were injected in randomized-sequence order, and the 2 examinations were separated by 2-14 days. MR imaging scanners, imaging sequences (T1-weighted spin-echo and T1-weighted high-resolution gradient-echo), and acquisition timing were identical for the 2 examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images for diagnostic information (degree of definition of lesion extent, lesion border delineation, visualization of lesion internal morphology, contrast enhancement) and quantitatively for percentage lesion enhancement and lesion-to-background ratio. Safety assessments were performed.

RESULTS

In Arm 1, a highly significant superiority (P < .002) of 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate was demonstrated by all readers for all end points. In Arm 2, no significant differences (P > .1) were observed for any reader and any end point, with the exception of percentage enhancement for reader 2 (P < .05) in favor of 0.05-mmol/kg gadobenate. Study agent-related adverse events were reported by 2/169 (1.2%) patients after gadobenate and by 5/175 (2.9%) patients after gadoterate.

CONCLUSIONS

Significantly superior morphologic information and contrast enhancement are demonstrated on brain MR imaging with 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate compared with 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate. No meaningful differences were recorded between 0.05-mmol/kg gadobenate and 0.1-mmol/kg gadoterate.