Bin Deng1,2,3, Mansi Saksena2,3, Steven Jay Isakoff3,4, Ralph Sinkus5, Samuel Patz3,6, and Stefan Alexandru Carp1,2,3
1Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, United States, 2Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States, 3Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States, 4Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States, 5Laboratory for Vascular Translational Science (LVTS), Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Paris, France, 6Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
1Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, United States, 2Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States, 3Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States, 4Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States, 5Laboratory for Vascular Translational Science (LVTS), Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Paris, France, 6Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
A multimodal MRE and optical imaging method, validated in a dual-contrast tissue mimicking phantom, offers complementary contrasts that highlight the heterogeneity of tumor biomechanical and vascular environment in a breast cancer patient.
Fig. 3: Multimodal images of a 33-y.o. breast cancer patient diagnosed of high-grade HER2+ invasive ductal carcinoma measured 4.5×2.6×2.6 cm. (a) T1-weighted fat saturated (FS) post-contrast MRI. (b) DOT image of total hemoglobin concentration (HbT) overlaid with simultaneously acquired T1 non-FS MRI. (c) Image of shear modulus measured by MRE. Red line – tumor marking. White dotted line – MRE actuator contact.
Fig. 2: Multimodal MRE/DOT imaging results of a dual-contrast tissue phantom. (a) T1 image showing three 20-mm diameter inclusions marked in circles. (b) MRE phase image obtained using 100Hz vibration showing wave propagation within the entire 12-cm diameter phantom with longer wavelengths inside inclusions. (c) Reconstructed shear modulus map and (d) absorption coefficient map shows clear contrasts in expected inclusion locations. Inclusion 3 was out of the optical coverage marked by the vertical dotted line in subplot (d), resulting in failure to recover its optical contrast.