Anatomy and physiology

Pharmacokinetic analysis of tissue microcirculation using nested models: Multimodel inference and parameter identifiability

Gunnar Brix

Department of Medical and Occupational Radiation Protection, Federal Office for Radiation Protection, D‐85762 Oberschleissheim, Germany

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: gbrix@bfs.de; Telephone: +49/1888/333‐2300; Fax: +49/1888/333‐2305.Search for more papers by this author
Stefan Zwick

Department of Medical Physics in Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), D‐69120 Heidelberg, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Fabian Kiessling

Department of Experimental Molecular Imaging, RWTH‐Aachen University, D‐52057 Aachen, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Jürgen Griebel

Department of Medical and Occupational Radiation Protection, Federal Office for Radiation Protection, D‐85762 Oberschleissheim, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 09 June 2009
Cited by: 46

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the identifiability of physiological tissue parameters by pharmacokinetic modeling of concentration‐time curves derived under conditions that are realistic for dynamic‐contrast‐enhanced (DCE) imaging and to assess the information‐theoretic approach of multimodel inference using nested models. Tissue curves with a realistic noise level were simulated by means of an axially distributed multipath reference model using typical values reported in literature on plasma flow, permeability‐surface area product, and volume fractions of the intravascular and interstitial space. The simulated curves were subsequently analyzed by a two‐compartment model containing these physiological quantities as fit parameters as well as by two reduced models with only three and two parameters formulated for the case of a permeability‐limited and a flow‐limited scenario, respectively. The competing models were ranked according to Akaike's information criterion (AIC), balancing the bias versus variance trade‐off. To utilize the information available from all three models, model‐averaged parameters were estimated using Akaike weights that quantify the relative strength of evidence in favor of each model. As compared to the full model, the reduced models yielded equivalent or even superior AIC values for scenarios where the structural information in the tissue curves on either the plasma flow or the capillary permeability was limited. Multimodel inference took effect to a considerable extent in half of the curves and improved the precision of the estimated tissue parameters. As theoretically expected, the plasma flow was subject to a systematic (but largely correctable) overestimation, whereas the other three physiological tissue parameters could be determined in a numerically robust and almost unbiased manner. The presented concept of pharmacokinetic analysis of noisy DCE data using three nested models under an information‐theoretic paradigm offers promising prospects for the noninvasive quantification of physiological tissue parameters.

Number of times cited: 46

  • , Estimating breast tumor blood flow during neoadjuvant chemotherapy using interleaved high temporal and high spatial resolution MRI, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 79, 1, (317-326), (2017).
  • , Perfusion and Permeability Imaging for Head and Neck Cancer, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America, 26, 1, (19), (2018).
  • , Measurement of extracellular volume and transit time heterogeneity using contrast‐enhanced myocardial perfusion MRI in patients after acute myocardial infarction, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 77, 6, (2320-2330), (2016).
  • , Two‐compartment modeling of tissue microcirculation revisited, Medical Physics, 44, 5, (1809-1822), (2017).
  • , A parametric model of the brain vascular system for estimation of the arterial input function (AIF) at the tissue level, NMR in Biomedicine, 30, 5, (2017).
  • , Parameter estimation of perfusion models in dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging: a unified framework for model comparison, Medical Image Analysis, 10.1016/j.media.2016.07.008, 35, (360-374), (2017).
  • , Tracer kinetic modelling for DCE-MRI quantification of subtle blood–brain barrier permeability, NeuroImage, 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.018, 125, (446-455), (2016).
  • , Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI in mice: An investigation of model parameter uncertainties, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 73, 5, (1979-1987), (2014).
  • , Radiation protection issues in dynamic contrast-enhanced (perfusion) computed tomography, European Journal of Radiology, 84, 12, (2347), (2015).
  • , Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma, Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000288, 39, 5, (687-696), (2015).
  • , Spatial two‐tissue compartment model for dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 63, 5, (695-713), (2014).
  • , Spatially regularized estimation for the analysis of dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data, Statistics in Medicine, 33, 6, (1029-1041), (2013).
  • , Models and methods for analyzing DCE‐MRI: A review, Medical Physics, 41, 12, (2014).
  • , Tracer kinetic model selection for dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of locally advanced cervical cancer, Acta Oncologica, 53, 8, (1064), (2014).
  • , Assessing the reproducibility of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a murine model of breast cancer, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 69, 6, (1721-1734), (2012).
  • , Subcompartmentalization of extracellular extravascular space (EES) into permeability and leaky space with local arterial input function (AIF) results in improved discrimination between high‐ and low‐grade glioma using dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE) MRI, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 38, 3, (677-688), (2013).
  • , Uncertainty estimation in dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 69, 4, (992-1002), (2012).
  • , Model selection in measures of vascular parameters using dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI: experimental and clinical applications, NMR in Biomedicine, 26, 8, (1028-1041), (2013).
  • , Classic models for dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI, NMR in Biomedicine, 26, 8, (1004-1027), (2013).
  • , Perfusion and vascular permeability: Basic concepts and measurement in DCE-CT and DCE-MRI, Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, 10.1016/j.diii.2013.10.010, 94, 12, (1187-1204), (2013).
  • , Imagerie de la perfusion tissulaire et de la perméabilité, Journal de Radiologie Diagnostique et Interventionnelle, 10.1016/j.jradio.2013.08.011, 94, 12, (1184-1202), (2013).
  • , Tracer-kinetic modeling of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and CT: a primer, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, 10.1007/s10928-013-9315-3, 40, 3, (281-300), (2013).
  • , Model selection for DCE‐T1 studies in glioblastoma, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 68, 1, (241-251), (2011).
  • , On impulse response functions computed from dynamic contrast-enhanced image data by algebraic deconvolution and compartmental modeling, Physica Medica, 28, 2, (119), (2012).
  • , Linear compartmental systems. I. kinetic analysis and derivation of their optimized symbolic equations, Journal of Mathematical Chemistry, 50, 6, (1598), (2012).
  • , Combined Quantification of Liver Perfusion and Function with Dynamic Gadoxetic Acid–enhanced MR Imaging, Radiology, 10.1148/radiol.12110337, 263, 3, (874-883), (2012).
  • , Imaging vascular function for early stage clinical trials using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, European Radiology, 10.1007/s00330-012-2446-x, 22, 7, (1451-1464), (2012).
  • , Tracer kinetic modelling in MRI: estimating perfusion and capillary permeability, Physics in Medicine and Biology, 10.1088/0031-9155/57/2/R1, 57, 2, (R1-R33), (2011).
  • , The Akaike information criterion in DCE-MRI: Does it improve the haemodynamic parameter estimates?, Physics in Medicine and Biology, 57, 11, (3609), (2012).
  • , Tracer Kinetic Model Selection for Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography Imaging of Prostate Cancer, Investigative Radiology, 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31821c0ea7, 47, 1, (41-48), (2012).
  • , Dynamische kontrastverstärkte Computertomographie, Der Radiologe, 52, 3, (277), (2012).
  • , Quantification of Perfusion and Permeability in Multiple Sclerosis, Investigative Radiology, 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31823bfc97, 47, 4, (252-258), (2012).
  • , Fundamentals of tracer kinetics for dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 34, 6, (1262-1276), (2011).
  • , On the scope and interpretation of the Tofts models for DCE‐MRI, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 66, 3, (735-745), (2011).
  • , Computerized evaluation of mean residence times in multicompartmental linear system and pharmacokinetics, Journal of Computational Chemistry, 32, 5, (915-931), (2010).
  • , Monitoring of Bevacizumab-Induced Antiangiogenic Treatment Effects By “Steady State” Ultrasmall Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide Particles Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Robust Multiecho ΔR2* Relaxometry, Investigative Radiology, (1), (2011).
  • , Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced CT Studies, Investigative Radiology, 46, 1, (64), (2011).
  • , Error estimation for perfusion parameters obtained using the two-compartment exchange model in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a simulation study, Physics in Medicine and Biology, 10.1088/0031-9155/55/21/006, 55, 21, (6431-6443), (2010).
  • , Tracer kinetic modelling of tumour angiogenesis based on dynamic contrast-enhanced CT and MRI measurements, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 37, S1, (30), (2010).
  • , Estimation of tissue perfusion by dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging: simulation-based evaluation of the steepest slope method, European Radiology, 20, 9, (2166), (2010).
  • , Technical aspects of MR perfusion, European Journal of Radiology, 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.02.017, 76, 3, (304-313), (2010).
  • , Simulation-based comparison of two approaches frequently used for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, European Radiology, 10.1007/s00330-009-1556-6, 20, 2, (432-442), (2009).
  • , Boosting in Nonlinear Regression Models with an Application to DCE-MRI Data, Methods of Information in Medicine, 10.3414/ME14-01-0131, 55, 1, (31-41), (2015).
  • , Impact of fitting algorithms on errors of parameter estimates in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, Physics in Medicine & Biology, 10.1088/1361-6560/aa8989, 62, 24, (9322-9340), (2017).
  • , Understanding K trans : a simulation study based on a multiple-pathway model , Physics in Medicine & Biology, 10.1088/1361-6560/aa70c9, 62, 13, (N297-N319), (2017).
  • , Shutter‐speed dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI: Is it fit for purpose?, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, , (2018).