Tobias Heye1, Matthew Davenport2, Jeff Horvath1, Sebastian Feuerlein1, Steven Breault1, Mustafa Bashir1, Elmar M. Merkle1, Daniel T. Boll1
1Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States; 2Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Although many factors contributing to overall measurement error have been identified, the effect of commercially available DCE-MRI post-processing solutions on quantitative (Ktrans, kep, ve) and semi-quantitative (iAUGC) pharmacokinetic parameters has yet to be defined. This study assessed the reproducibility of pharmacokinetic parameters between various commercially available post-processing solutions for DCE-MRI (Tissue4DTM, Siemens, Germany; DynaCADTM, Invivo, USA; AegisTM, Sentinelle Medical, Canada; CADvueTM; iCAD, Inc., USA). There is substantial variability (25.1-74.1% coefficient of variation) for DCE-MRI pharmacokinetic parameters across commercially available DCE-MRI post-processing solutions. If DCE-MRI is to succeed as a widely incorporated biomarker, the industry must agree on a post-processing standard.
Keywords