4.4 Article

Oxygenation in cervical cancer and normal uterine cervix assessed using blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) MRI at 3T

Journal

NMR IN BIOMEDICINE
Volume 25, Issue 12, Pages 1321-1330

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/nbm.2804

Keywords

hypoxia; MRI; cervical cancer; BOLD; oxygen

Funding

  1. Mary Kay Ash Foundation
  2. Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center [1 P30 CA142543]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hypoxia is reported to be a biomarker for poor prognosis in cervical cancer. However, a practical noninvasive method is needed for the routine clinical evaluation of tumor hypoxia. This study examined the potential use of blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) contrast MRI as a noninvasive technique to assess tumor vascular oxygenation at 3T. Following Institutional Review Board-approved informed consent and in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, successful results were achieved in nine patients with locally advanced cervical cancer [International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIA to IVA] and three normal volunteers. In the first four patients, dynamic T2*-weighted MRI was performed in the transaxial plane using a multi-shot echo planar imaging sequence whilst patients breathed room air followed by oxygen (15 dm3/min). Later, a multi-echo gradient echo examination was added to provide quantitative R2* measurements. The baseline T2*-weighted signal intensity was quite stable, but increased to various extents in tumors on initiation of oxygen breathing. The signal in normal uterus increased significantly, whereas that in the iliacus muscle did not change. R2* responded significantly in healthy uterus, cervix and eight cervical tumors. This preliminary study demonstrates that BOLD MRI of cervical cancer at 3T is feasible. However, more patients must be evaluated and followed clinically before any prognostic value can be determined. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available