1
|
Deen SS, Rooney C, Shinozaki A, McGing J, Grist JT, Tyler DJ, Serrão E, Gallagher FA. Hyperpolarized Carbon 13 MRI: Clinical Applications and Future Directions in Oncology. Radiol Imaging Cancer 2023; 5:e230005. [PMID: 37682052 PMCID: PMC10546364 DOI: 10.1148/rycan.230005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2023] [Revised: 06/16/2023] [Accepted: 08/02/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Abstract
Hyperpolarized carbon 13 MRI (13C MRI) is a novel imaging approach that can noninvasively probe tissue metabolism in both normal and pathologic tissues. The process of hyperpolarization increases the signal acquired by several orders of magnitude, allowing injected 13C-labeled molecules and their downstream metabolites to be imaged in vivo, thus providing real-time information on kinetics. To date, the most important reaction studied with hyperpolarized 13C MRI is exchange of the hyperpolarized 13C signal from injected [1-13C]pyruvate with the resident tissue lactate pool. Recent preclinical and human studies have shown the role of several biologic factors such as the lactate dehydrogenase enzyme, pyruvate transporter expression, and tissue hypoxia in generating the MRI signal from this reaction. Potential clinical applications of hyperpolarized 13C MRI in oncology include using metabolism to stratify tumors by grade, selecting therapeutic pathways based on tumor metabolic profiles, and detecting early treatment response through the imaging of shifts in metabolism that precede tumor structural changes. This review summarizes the foundations of hyperpolarized 13C MRI, presents key findings from human cancer studies, and explores the future clinical directions of the technique in oncology. Keywords: Hyperpolarized Carbon 13 MRI, Molecular Imaging, Cancer, Tissue Metabolism © RSNA, 2023.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Surrin S Deen
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - Catriona Rooney
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - Ayaka Shinozaki
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - Jordan McGing
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - James T Grist
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - Damian J Tyler
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - Eva Serrão
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| | - Ferdia A Gallagher
- From the Department of Radiology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England (S.S.D., E.S., F.A.G.); Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics (C.R., A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.) and the Oxford Centre for Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research (A.S., J.T.G., D.J.T.), University of Oxford, Oxford, England; Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, England (J.M., J.T.G.); Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England (J.T.G.); Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (E.S., F.A.G.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Centre, Cambridge, England (F.A.G.); and Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (E.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kamson DO, Chinnasamy V, Grossman SA, Bettegowda C, Barker PB, Stacpoole PW, Oeltzschner G. In-vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy of lactate as a non-invasive biomarker of dichloroacetate activity in cancer and non-cancer central nervous system disorders. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1077461. [PMID: 37007074 PMCID: PMC10063958 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1077461] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2022] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 03/19/2023] Open
Abstract
The adverse effects of lactic acidosis in the cancer microenvironment have been increasingly recognized. Dichloroacetate (DCA) is an orally bioavailable, blood brain barrier penetrable drug that has been extensively studied in the treatment of mitochondrial neurologic conditions to reduce lactate production. Due to its effect reversing aerobic glycolysis (i.e., Warburg-effect) and thus lactic acidosis, DCA became a drug of interest in cancer as well. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) is a well-established, non-invasive technique that allows detection of prominent metabolic changes, such as shifts in lactate or glutamate levels. Thus, MRS is a potential radiographic biomarker to allow spatial and temporal mapping of DCA treatment. In this systematic literature review, we gathered the available evidence on the use of various MRS techniques to track metabolic changes after DCA administration in neurologic and oncologic disorders. We included in vitro, animal, and human studies. Evidence confirms that DCA has substantial effects on lactate and glutamate levels in neurologic and oncologic disease, which are detectable by both experimental and routine clinical MRS approaches. Data from mitochondrial diseases show slower lactate changes in the central nervous system (CNS) that correlate better with clinical function compared to blood. This difference is most striking in focal impairments of lactate metabolism suggesting that MRS might provide data not captured by solely monitoring blood. In summary, our findings corroborate the feasibility of MRS as a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic biomarker of DCA delivery in the CNS, that is ready to be integrated into currently ongoing and future human clinical trials using DCA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David O. Kamson
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
- Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
- *Correspondence: David O. Kamson, ; Georg Oeltzschner,
| | - Viveka Chinnasamy
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Stuart A. Grossman
- The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Chetan Bettegowda
- Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Peter B. Barker
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States
- F. M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Peter W. Stacpoole
- Departments of Medicine and Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Georg Oeltzschner
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States
- F. M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, United States
- *Correspondence: David O. Kamson, ; Georg Oeltzschner,
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Capozza M, Anemone A, Dhakan C, Della Peruta M, Bracesco M, Zullino S, Villano D, Terreno E, Longo DL, Aime S. GlucoCEST MRI for the Evaluation Response to Chemotherapeutic and Metabolic Treatments in a Murine Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Comparison with[ 18F]F-FDG-PET. Mol Imaging Biol 2021; 24:126-134. [PMID: 34383241 DOI: 10.1007/s11307-021-01637-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2021] [Revised: 06/30/2021] [Accepted: 07/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients have usually poor outcome after chemotherapy and early prediction of therapeutic response would be helpful. [18F]F-FDG-PET/CT acquisitions are often carried out to monitor variation in metabolic activity associated with response to the therapy, despite moderate accuracy and radiation exposure limit its application. The glucoCEST technique relies on the use of unlabelled D-glucose to assess glucose uptake with conventional MRI scanners and is currently under active investigations at clinical level. This work aims at validating the potential of MRI-glucoCEST in monitoring the therapeutic responses in a TNBC tumor murine model. PROCEDURES Breast tumor (4T1)-bearing mice were treated with doxorubicin or dichloroacetate for 1 week. PET/CT with [18F]F-FDG and MRI-glucoCEST were performed at baseline and after 3 cycles of treatment. Metabolic changes measured with [18F]F-FDG-PET and glucoCEST were compared and evaluated with changes in tumor volumes. RESULTS Doxorubicin-treated mice showed a significant decrease in tumor growth when compared to the control group. GlucoCEST imaging provided metabolic response after three cycles of treatment. Conversely, no variations were detected in [18F]F-FDG uptake. Dichloroacetate-treated mice did not show any decrease either in tumor volume or in tumor metabolic activity as assessed by both glucoCEST and [18F]F-FDG-PET. CONCLUSIONS Metabolic changes during doxorubicin treatment can be predicted by glucoCEST imaging that appears more sensitive than [18F]F-FDG-PET in reporting on therapeutic response. These findings support the view that glucoCEST may be a sensitive technique for monitoring metabolic response, but future studies are needed to explore the accuracy of this approach in other tumor types and treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martina Capozza
- Center for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Annasofia Anemone
- Molecular Imaging Center, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Chetan Dhakan
- Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging (IBB), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Nizza 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Melania Della Peruta
- Center for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Martina Bracesco
- Center for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Sara Zullino
- Molecular Imaging Center, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Daisy Villano
- Molecular Imaging Center, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Enzo Terreno
- Center for Preclinical Imaging, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy.,Molecular Imaging Center, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy.,Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging (IBB), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Nizza 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Dario Livio Longo
- Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging (IBB), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Nizza 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| | - Silvio Aime
- Molecular Imaging Center, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza, 52, Turin, 10126, Italy.,Institute of Biostructures and Bioimaging (IBB), National Research Council of Italy (CNR), Via Nizza 52, Turin, 10126, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sorace AG, Elkassem AA, Galgano SJ, Lapi SE, Larimer BM, Partridge SC, Quarles CC, Reeves K, Napier TS, Song PN, Yankeelov TE, Woodard S, Smith AD. Imaging for Response Assessment in Cancer Clinical Trials. Semin Nucl Med 2020; 50:488-504. [PMID: 33059819 PMCID: PMC7573201 DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2020.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
The use of biomarkers is integral to the routine management of cancer patients, including diagnosis of disease, clinical staging and response to therapeutic intervention. Advanced imaging metrics with computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET) are used to assess response during new drug development and in cancer research for predictive metrics of response. Key components and challenges to identifying an appropriate imaging biomarker are selection of integral vs integrated biomarkers, choosing an appropriate endpoint and modality, and standardization of the imaging biomarkers for cooperative and multicenter trials. Imaging biomarkers lean on the original proposed quantified metrics derived from imaging such as tumor size or longest dimension, with the most commonly implemented metrics in clinical trials coming from the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria, and then adapted versions such as immune-RECIST (iRECIST) and Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) for immunotherapy response and PET imaging, respectively. There have been many widely adopted biomarkers in clinical trials derived from MRI including metrics that describe cellularity and vascularity from diffusion-weighted (DW)-MRI apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast (DSC) or dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE)-MRI (Ktrans, relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV)), respectively. Furthermore, Fluorodexoyglucose (FDG), fluorothymidine (FLT), and fluoromisonidazole (FMISO)-PET imaging, which describe molecular markers of glucose metabolism, proliferation and hypoxia have been implemented into various cancer types to assess therapeutic response to a wide variety of targeted- and chemotherapies. Recently, there have been many functional and molecular novel imaging biomarkers that are being developed that are rapidly being integrated into clinical trials (with anticipation of being implemented into clinical workflow in the future), such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning computational strategies, antibody and peptide specific molecular imaging, and advanced diffusion MRI. These include prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and trastuzumab-PET, vascular tumor burden extracted from contrast-enhanced CT, diffusion kurtosis imaging, and CD8 or Granzyme B PET imaging. Further excitement surrounds theranostic procedures such as the combination of 68Ga/111In- and 177Lu-DOTATATE to use integral biomarkers to direct care and personalize therapy. However, there are many challenges in the implementation of imaging biomarkers that remains, including understand the accuracy, repeatability and reproducibility of both acquisition and analysis of these imaging biomarkers. Despite the challenges associated with the biological and technical validation of novel imaging biomarkers, a distinct roadmap has been created that is being implemented into many clinical trials to advance the development and implementation to create specific and sensitive novel imaging biomarkers of therapeutic response to continue to transform medical oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna G Sorace
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
| | - Asser A Elkassem
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Samuel J Galgano
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Suzanne E Lapi
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Department of Chemistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Benjamin M Larimer
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | | | - C Chad Quarles
- Division of Neuroimaging Research, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Kirsten Reeves
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Cancer Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Tiara S Napier
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Cancer Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Patrick N Song
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Thomas E Yankeelov
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX; Department of Diagnostic Medicine, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX; Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
| | - Stefanie Woodard
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| | - Andrew D Smith
- Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
| |
Collapse
|