In vivo characterization of brain tumor biomechanics: magnetic resonance elastography in intracranial B16 melanoma and GL261 glioma mouse models

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Frontiers in Oncology Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.3389/fonc.2024.1402578
Anastasia Janas, Jakob Jordan, Gergely Bertalan, Tom Meyer, Jan Bukatz, Ingolf Sack, Carolin Senger, Melina Nieminen-Kelhä, Susan Brandenburg, Irina Kremenskaia, Kiril Krantchev, Sanaria Al-Rubaiey, Susanne Mueller, Stefan Paul Koch, Philipp Boehm-Sturm, Rolf Reiter, Daniel Zips, Peter Vajkoczy, Gueliz Acker
{"title":"In vivo characterization of brain tumor biomechanics: magnetic resonance elastography in intracranial B16 melanoma and GL261 glioma mouse models","authors":"Anastasia Janas, Jakob Jordan, Gergely Bertalan, Tom Meyer, Jan Bukatz, Ingolf Sack, Carolin Senger, Melina Nieminen-Kelhä, Susan Brandenburg, Irina Kremenskaia, Kiril Krantchev, Sanaria Al-Rubaiey, Susanne Mueller, Stefan Paul Koch, Philipp Boehm-Sturm, Rolf Reiter, Daniel Zips, Peter Vajkoczy, Gueliz Acker","doi":"10.3389/fonc.2024.1402578","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionMagnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE) allows the non-invasive quantification of tumor biomechanical properties <jats:italic>in vivo</jats:italic>. With increasing incidence of brain metastases, there is a notable absence of appropriate preclinical models to investigate their biomechanical characteristics. Therefore, the purpose of this work was to assess the biomechanical characteristics of B16 melanoma brain metastases (MBM) and compare it to murine GL261 glioblastoma (GBM) model using multifrequency MRE with tomoelastography post processing.MethodsIntracranial B16 MBM (n = 6) and GL261 GBM (n = 7) mouse models were used. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was performed at set intervals after tumor implantation: 5, 7, 12, 14 days for MBM and 13 and 22 days for GBM. The investigations were performed using a 7T preclinical MRI with 20 mm head coil. The protocol consisted of single-shot spin echo-planar multifrequency MRE with tomoelastography post processing, contrast-enhanced T1- and T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with quantification of apparent diffusion coefficient of water (ADC). Elastography quantified shear wave speed (SWS), magnitude of complex MR signal (T2/T2*) and loss angle (φ). Immunohistological investigations were performed to assess vascularization, blood-brain-barrier integrity and extent of glucosaminoglucan coverage.ResultsVolumetric analyses displayed rapid growth of both tumor entities and softer tissue properties than healthy brain (healthy: 5.17 ± 0.48, MBM: 3.83 ± 0.55, GBM: 3.7 ± 0.23, [m/s]). SWS of MBM remained unchanged throughout tumor progression with decreased T2/T2* intensity and increased ADC on days 12 and 14 (p&amp;lt;0.0001 for both). Conversely, GBM presented reduced φ values on day 22 (p=0.0237), with no significant alterations in ADC. Histological analysis revealed substantial vascularization and elevated glycosaminoglycan content in both tumor types compared to healthy contralateral brain.DiscussionOur results indicate that while both, MBM and GBM, exhibited softer properties compared to healthy brain, imaging and histological analysis revealed different underlying microstructural causes: hemorrhages in MBM and increased vascularization and glycosaminoglycan content in GBM, further corroborated by DWI and T2/T2* contrast. These findings underscore the complementary nature of MRE and its potential to enhance our understanding of tumor characteristics when used alongside established techniques. This comprehensive approach could lead to improved clinical outcomes and a deeper understanding of brain tumor pathophysiology.","PeriodicalId":12482,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1402578","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionMagnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE) allows the non-invasive quantification of tumor biomechanical properties in vivo. With increasing incidence of brain metastases, there is a notable absence of appropriate preclinical models to investigate their biomechanical characteristics. Therefore, the purpose of this work was to assess the biomechanical characteristics of B16 melanoma brain metastases (MBM) and compare it to murine GL261 glioblastoma (GBM) model using multifrequency MRE with tomoelastography post processing.MethodsIntracranial B16 MBM (n = 6) and GL261 GBM (n = 7) mouse models were used. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was performed at set intervals after tumor implantation: 5, 7, 12, 14 days for MBM and 13 and 22 days for GBM. The investigations were performed using a 7T preclinical MRI with 20 mm head coil. The protocol consisted of single-shot spin echo-planar multifrequency MRE with tomoelastography post processing, contrast-enhanced T1- and T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with quantification of apparent diffusion coefficient of water (ADC). Elastography quantified shear wave speed (SWS), magnitude of complex MR signal (T2/T2*) and loss angle (φ). Immunohistological investigations were performed to assess vascularization, blood-brain-barrier integrity and extent of glucosaminoglucan coverage.ResultsVolumetric analyses displayed rapid growth of both tumor entities and softer tissue properties than healthy brain (healthy: 5.17 ± 0.48, MBM: 3.83 ± 0.55, GBM: 3.7 ± 0.23, [m/s]). SWS of MBM remained unchanged throughout tumor progression with decreased T2/T2* intensity and increased ADC on days 12 and 14 (p&lt;0.0001 for both). Conversely, GBM presented reduced φ values on day 22 (p=0.0237), with no significant alterations in ADC. Histological analysis revealed substantial vascularization and elevated glycosaminoglycan content in both tumor types compared to healthy contralateral brain.DiscussionOur results indicate that while both, MBM and GBM, exhibited softer properties compared to healthy brain, imaging and histological analysis revealed different underlying microstructural causes: hemorrhages in MBM and increased vascularization and glycosaminoglycan content in GBM, further corroborated by DWI and T2/T2* contrast. These findings underscore the complementary nature of MRE and its potential to enhance our understanding of tumor characteristics when used alongside established techniques. This comprehensive approach could lead to improved clinical outcomes and a deeper understanding of brain tumor pathophysiology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脑肿瘤生物力学的体内表征:颅内 B16 黑色素瘤和 GL261 胶质瘤小鼠模型的磁共振弹性成像技术
导言磁共振弹性成像(MRE)可对体内肿瘤的生物力学特性进行无创量化。随着脑转移瘤发病率的增加,目前明显缺乏合适的临床前模型来研究其生物力学特性。因此,这项研究的目的是评估 B16 黑色素瘤脑转移瘤(MBM)的生物力学特性,并利用多频 MRE 和断层弹性成像后处理技术将其与小鼠 GL261 胶母细胞瘤(GBM)模型进行比较。肿瘤植入后,在设定的时间间隔内进行磁共振成像(MRI)检查:MBM为5、7、12和14天,GBM为13和22天。研究使用带 20 毫米头部线圈的 7T 临床前核磁共振成像仪进行。检查方案包括带有断层弹性成像后处理功能的单次自旋回波平面多频 MRE、对比增强 T1 和 T2 加权成像以及带有表观水扩散系数(ADC)量化功能的扩散加权成像(DWI)。弹性成像可量化剪切波速度(SWS)、复合磁共振信号的大小(T2/T2*)和损耗角(φ)。免疫组织学检查用于评估血管化、血脑屏障完整性和葡萄糖胺葡聚糖的覆盖范围。结果肿胀分析表明,与健康大脑相比,两种肿瘤实体都生长迅速,组织特性更软(健康:5.17 ± 0.48,MBM:3.83 ± 0.55,GBM:3.7 ± 0.23,[m/s])。MBM 的 SWS 在整个肿瘤进展过程中保持不变,但在第 12 天和第 14 天 T2/T2* 强度降低,ADC 增加(两者均为 p&lt;0.0001)。相反,GBM 的 φ 值在第 22 天降低(p=0.0237),ADC 没有明显变化。讨论我们的研究结果表明,与健康大脑相比,MBM 和 GBM 都表现出较软的特性,但成像和组织学分析显示了不同的潜在微观结构原因:MBM 存在出血,而 GBM 的血管化和糖胺聚糖含量增加,DWI 和 T2/T2* 对比进一步证实了这一点。这些发现强调了 MRE 的互补性,以及它与现有技术一起使用时增强我们对肿瘤特征了解的潜力。这种综合方法可以改善临床疗效,加深对脑肿瘤病理生理学的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Oncology
Frontiers in Oncology Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.60%
发文量
6641
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Imaging and Diagnosis is dedicated to the publication of results from clinical and research studies applied to cancer diagnosis and treatment. The section aims to publish studies from the entire field of cancer imaging: results from routine use of clinical imaging in both radiology and nuclear medicine, results from clinical trials, experimental molecular imaging in humans and small animals, research on new contrast agents in CT, MRI, ultrasound, publication of new technical applications and processing algorithms to improve the standardization of quantitative imaging and image guided interventions for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.
期刊最新文献
2-methoxyestradiol inhibits the malignant behavior of triple negative breast cancer cells by altering their miRNome Effect of prehabilitation exercises on postoperative frailty in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery Biomarkers of lymph node metastasis in colorectal cancer: update ABHD5 as a friend or an enemy in cancer biology? Clinicopathological features, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes among Syrian patients with advanced breast cancer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1