No abstract

Filter-exchange spectroscopy (FEXSY) and imaging (FEXI) are sensitive to transmembrane water exchange, which is commonly altered during cell death1. Yeast cells in different permeabilization stages were studied with FEXI, DWI and CFDA-AM/ propidium iodide (PI) staining using flow cytometry. Cell populations with 3.8% PI positive staining had 44% increased AXR, but unchanged ADC. At 33% nonvital cells, detection of AXR became unreliable and ADC increased. In vivo FEXI and DWI in EL4 lymphoma, with H&E-confirmed necrotic tumor cells and edema, showed AXR and ADC variations across the tumor, possibly due to differing vitality cell stages.

Objectives Development of a protocol for validation and quality assurance of filter-exchange imaging (FEXI) pulse sequences with well-defined and reproducible phantoms. Materials and methods A FEXI pulse sequence was implemented on a 7 T preclinical MRI scanner. Six experiments in three different test categories were established for sequence validation, demonstration of the reproducibility of phantoms and the measurement of induced changes in the apparent exchange rate (AXR). First, an ice–water phantom was used to investigate the consistency of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements with different diffusion filters. Second, yeast cell phantoms were utilized to validate the determination of the AXR in terms of repeatability (same phantom and session), reproducibility (separate but comparable phantoms in different sessions) and directionality of diffusion encodings. Third, the yeast cell phantoms were, furthermore, used to assess potential AXR bias because of altered cell density and temperature. In addition, a treatment experiment with aquaporin inhibitors was performed to evaluate the influence of these compounds on the cell membrane permeability in yeast cells. Results FEXI-based ADC measurements of an ice–water phantom were performed for three different filter strengths, showed good agreement with the literature value of 1.099 × 10–3 mm2/s and had a maximum coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.55% within the individual filter strengths. AXR estimation in a single yeast cell phantom and imaging session with five repetitions resulted in an overall mean value of (1.49 ± 0.05) s−1 and a CV of 3.4% between the chosen regions of interest. For three separately prepared phantoms, AXR measurements resulted in a mean value of (1.50 ± 0.04) s−1 and a CV of 2.7% across the three phantoms, demonstrating high reproducibility. Across three orthogonal diffusion directions, a mean value of (1.57 ± 0.03) s−1 with a CV of 1.9% was detected, consistent with isotropy of AXR in yeast cells. Temperature and AXR were linearly correlated (R2 = 0.99) and an activation energy EA of 37.7 kJ/mol was determined by Arrhenius plot. Furthermore, a negative correlation was found between cell density (as determined by the reference ADC/fe) and AXR (R2 = 0.95). The treatment experiment resulted in significantly decreased AXR values at different temperatures in the treated sample compared to the untreated control indicating an inhibiting effect. Conclusions Using ice–water and yeast cell-based phantoms, a protocol for the validation of FEXI pulse sequences was established for the assessment of stability, repeatability, reproducibility and directionality. In addition, a strong dependence of AXR on cell density and temperature was shown. As AXR is an emerging novel imaging biomarker, the suggested protocol will be useful for quality assurance of AXR measurements within a study and potentially across multiple sites.