Back

Voxel-wise tracer kinetic model selection for DCE-MRI measurements of blood-brain barrier leakage

Jones, O. A.; Dickie, B. R.; Berks, M.; Al-Bachari, S.; Emsley, H. C. A.; Parkes, L. M.

2026-06-02 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.05.29.728495 bioRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeTo apply voxel-wise tracer kinetic model selection, characterise the spatial distribution of best-fitting models across the brain, and evaluate whether model selection improves sensitivity for differentiating normal-appearing tissue from pathological tissue compared to the Patlak model. MethodsExtended Tofts, Patlak, and intravascular models were fit to DCE-MRI data from stroke survivors and controls, as well as simulated data. The best-fitting model was chosen for each voxel using the Akaike Information Criterion, and model selection Ktrans (estimates from the best-fitting model for each voxel) compared to Patlak model Ktrans. ResultsIn simulated data, the Extended Tofts model was best-fitting at Ktrans>10-3 min-1, where the Patlak model systematically underestimated Ktrans. Patlak was optimal at Ktrans between 10-4-10-3 min-1, where Extended Tofts estimates had greater variability. The intravascular model was selected for Ktrans[~]10-4 min-1. The Patlak model was chosen in most control voxels. In chronic stroke, the Extended Tofts model was preferred in most cortical and white matter hyperintensity voxels, while the Patlak model was selected in most deep grey matter and normal-appearing white matter voxels. Model selection Ktrans estimates were significantly greater than Patlak estimates in the cortex and white matter hyperintensities, with greater inter-patient variability, likely reflecting biological variability in blood-brain barrier leakage resulting from stroke. ConclusionVoxel-wise model selection may provide more accurate estimates of a wider range of Ktrans values than any single model, revealing greater differences between normal and pathological tissue and offering a more sensitive and physiologically appropriate framework for DCE-MRI analysis of blood-brain barrier dysfunction.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.2%
2
NMR in Biomedicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
3
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
72 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.1%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
5
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.8%
6
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.8%
7
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.6%
9
Fluids and Barriers of the CNS
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
10
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.6%
11
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.3%
12
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
13
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
14
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
15
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
38 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
16
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
17
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
18
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
19
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring
38 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
28 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
22
Aperture Neuro
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
23
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 66%
0.6%