The Benefits of High Relaxivity for Brain Tumor Imaging: Results of a Multicenter Intraindividual Crossover Comparison of Gadobenate Dimeglumine with Gadoterate Meglumine (The BENEFIT Study)

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Maravilla KR,
   3. Maldjian JA,
   4. Schmalfuss IM, et al

   . Contrast enhancement of central nervous system lesions: multicenter intraindividual crossover comparative study of two MR contrast agents. Radiology 2006;240:389–400 doi:10.1148/radiol.2402051266 pmid:16801373

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   2. Rumboldt Z,
   3. Rowley HA,
   4. Steinberg F, et al

   . Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, intra-individual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine in MRI of brain tumors at 3 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;29:760–67 doi:10.1002/jmri.21695 pmid:19306364

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Rowley HA,
   3. Scialfa G,
   4. Gao PY, et al

   . Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of brain lesions: a large-scale intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine versus gadodiamide. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:1684–91 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1185 pmid:18599575

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   2. Seidl Z,
   3. Vymazal J,
   4. Mechl M, et al

   . Does higher gadolinium concentration play a role in the morphologic assessment of brain tumors? Results of a multicenter intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobutrol versus gadobenate dimeglumine (the MERIT Study). AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1050–58 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3033 pmid:22383237

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   2. Shen Y,
   3. Goerner FL,
   4. Snyder C, et al

   . T1 relaxivities of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance contrast agents in human whole blood at 1.5, 3, and 7 T. Invest Radiol 2015;50:330–38 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000132 pmid:25658049

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Colosimo C,
   3. Knopp MV,
   4. Barreau X, et al

   . A comparison of Gd-BOPTA and Gd-DOTA for contrast-enhanced MRI of intracranial tumours. Neuroradiology 2004;46:655–65 doi:10.1007/s00234-003-1128-4 pmid:15205859

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Khouri Chalouhi K,
   3. Papini GD,
   4. Bandirali M, et al

   . Less is better? Intraindividual and interindividual comparison between 0.075 mmol/kg of gadobenate dimeglumine and 0.1 mmol/kg of gadoterate meglumine for cranial MRI. Eur J Radiol 2014;83:1245–49 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.03.030 pmid:24816087

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Greco A,
   3. Parker JR,
   4. Ratcliffe CG, et al

   . Phase III, randomized, double-blind, cross-over comparison of gadoteridol and gadopentetate dimeglumine in magnetic resonance imaging of patients with intracranial lesions. Australas Radiol 2001;45:457–63 doi:10.1046/j.1440-1673.2001.00957.x pmid:11903179

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Maravilla KR,
   3. Smith MP,
   4. Vymazal J, et al

   . Are there differences between macrocyclic gadolinium contrast agents for brain tumor imaging? Results of a multicenter intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobutrol with gadoteridol (the TRUTH study). AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:14–23 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4154 pmid:25300984

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    2. Gutierrez JE,
    3. Rosenberg M,
    4. Seemann J, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of gadobutrol for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the central nervous system: results from a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, comparator study. Magn Reson Insights 2015;8:1–10 doi:10.4137/MRI.S19794 pmid:25922578

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Anzalone N,
    3. Scarabino T,
    4. Venturi C, et al

    . Cerebral neoplastic enhancing lesions: multicenter, randomized, crossover intraindividual comparison between gadobutrol (1.0M) and gadoterate meglumine (0.5M) at 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight in a clinical setting. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:139–45 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.07.005 pmid:21890295

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Kanal E,
    3. Maravilla K,
    4. Rowley HA

    . Gadolinium contrast agents for CNS imaging: current concepts and clinical evidence. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:2215–26 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3917 pmid:24852287

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    2. Colosimo C,
    3. Ruscalleda J,
    4. Korves M, et al

    . Detection of intracranial metastases: a multicenter, intrapatient comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI with routinely used contrast agents at equal dosage. Invest Radiol 2001;36:72–81 doi:10.1097/00004424-200102000-00002 pmid:11224754

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Knopp MV,
    3. Runge VM,
    4. Essig M, et al

    . Primary and secondary brain tumors at MR imaging: bicentric intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology 2004;230:55–64 doi:10.1148/radiol.2301021085 pmid:14695387

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Essig M,
    3. Tartaro A,
    4. Tartaglione T, et al

    . Enhancing lesions of the brain: intraindividual crossover comparison of contrast enhancement after gadobenate dimeglumine versus established gadolinium comparators. Acad Radiol 2006;13:744–51 doi:10.1016/j.acra.2006.02.056 pmid:16679277

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Kuhn MJ,
    3. Picozzi P,
    4. Maldjian JA, et al

    . Evaluation of intraaxial enhancing brain tumors on magnetic resonance imaging: intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for visualization and assessment, and implications for surgical intervention. J Neurosurg 2007;106:557–66 doi:10.3171/jns.2007.106.4.557 pmid:17432704

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Koenig M,
    3. Schulte-Altedorneburg G,
    4. Piontek M, et al

    . Intra-individual, randomised comparison of the MRI contrast agents gadobutrol versus gadoteridol in patients with primary and secondary brain tumours, evaluated in a blinded read. Eur Radiol 2013;23:3287–95 doi:10.1007/s00330-013-2946-3 pmid:23824152

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Feinstein AR,
    3. Cicchetti DV

    . High agreement but low kappa, I: the problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:543–49 doi:10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-L pmid:2348207

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    2. Kanda T,
    3. Ishii K,
    4. Kawaguchi H, et al

    . High signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: relationship with increasing cumulative dose of a gadolinium-based contrast material. Radiology 2014;270:834–41 doi:10.1148/radiol.13131669 pmid:24475844

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Errante Y,
    3. Cirimele V,
    4. Mallio CA, et al

    . Progressive increase of T1 signal intensity of the dentate nucleus on unenhanced magnetic resonance images is associated with cumulative doses of intravenously administered gadodiamide in patients with normal renal function, suggesting dechelation. Invest Radiol 2014;49:685–90 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000072 pmid:24872007

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Kanda T,
    3. Osawa M,
    4. Oba H, et al

    . High signal intensity in dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: association with linear versus macrocyclic gadolinium chelate administration. Radiology 2015;275:803–09 doi:10.1148/radiol.14140364 pmid:25633504

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. McDonald RJ,
    3. McDonald JS,
    4. Kallmes DF, et al

    . Intracranial gadolinium deposition after contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2015;275:772–82 doi:10.1148/radiol.15150025 pmid:25742194

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Quattrocchi CC,
    3. Mallio CA,
    4. Errante Y, et al

    . Gadodiamide and dentate nucleus T1 hyperintensity in patients with meningioma evaluated by multiple follow-up contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance examinations with no systemic interval therapy. Invest Radiol 2015;50:470–72 doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000154 pmid:25756685

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Radbruch A,
    3. Weberling LD,
    4. Kieslich PJ, et al

    . Gadolinium retention in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus is dependent on the class of contrast agent. Radiology 2015;275:783–91 doi:10.1148/radiol.2015150337 pmid:25848905

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Idée JM,
    3. Port M,
    4. Robic C, et al

    . Role of thermodynamic and kinetic parameters in gadolinium chelate stability. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;30:1249–58 doi:10.1002/jmri.21967 pmid:19938037

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    2. Heverhagen JT,
    3. Krombach GA,
    4. Gizewski E

    . Application of extracellular gadolinium-based MRI contrast agents and the risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Rofo 2014;186:661–69 doi:10.1055/s-0033-1356403 pmid:24477507

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Soulez G,
    3. Bloomgarden DC,
    4. Rofsky NM, et al

    . Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in patients with stages 3 to 5 chronic kidney disease undergoing MRI with the injection of gadobenate dimeglumine or gadoteridol: findings from prospective cohort studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. In press
28. 28.↵
    2. Nandwana SB,
    3. Moreno CC,
    4. Osipow MT, et al

    . Gadobenate dimeglumine administration and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: is there a real risk in patients with impaired renal function? Radiology 2015 Apr 15. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1148/radiol.2015142423 pmid:25875973

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    American College of Radiology (ACR) Manual on Contrast Media. Version 9. 2013. http://www.acr.org/quality-safety/resources/∼/media/37D84428BF1D4E1B9A3A2918DA9E27A3.pdf/. Accessed June 19, 2015.
30. 30.↵
    The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists. Guideline on the Use of Gadolinium-Containing MRI Contrast Agents in Patients with Renal Impairment. https://www.nephrology.edu.au/members/documents/GuidelinesontheUseofGadolinium-containingMRIContrastAgents10thSeptember.pdf. Accessed June 19, 2015.
31. 31.↵
    2. Kirchin MA,
    3. Lorusso V,
    4. Pirovano G

    . Compensatory biliary and urinary excretion of gadobenate ion after administration of gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance(®)) in cases of impaired hepatic or renal function: a mechanism that may aid in the prevention of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis? Br J Radiol 2015;88:20140526 doi:10.1259/bjr.20140526 pmid:25651409

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    2. Noebauer-Huhmann IM,
    3. Szomolanyi P,
    4. Kronnerwetter C, et al

    . Brain tumours at 7T MRI compared to 3T–contrast effect after half and full standard contrast agent dose: initial results. Eur Radiol 2015;25:106–12 doi:10.1007/s00330-014-3351-2 pmid:25194707

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    2. Sandstede JJ,
    3. Beer M,
    4. Lipke C, et al

    . Time course of contrast enhancement patterns after Gd-BOPTA in correlation to myocardial infarction and viability: a feasibility study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;14:789–94 doi:10.1002/jmri.10007 pmid:11747037

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. Achenbach M,
    3. Figiel JH,
    4. Burbelko M, et al

    . Prospective comparison of image quality and diagnostic accuracy of 0.5 molar gadobenate dimeglumine and 1.0 molar gadobutrol in contrast-enhanced run-off magnetic resonance angiography of the lower extremities. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;32:1166–71 doi:10.1002/jmri.22355 pmid:21031523

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    2. Morana G,
    3. Grazioli L,
    4. Kirchin MA, et al

    . Solid hypervascular liver lesions: accurate identification of true benign lesions on enhanced dynamic and hepatobiliary phase magnetic resonance imaging after gadobenate dimeglumine administration. Invest Radiol 2011;46:225–39 doi:10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181feee3a pmid:21102346

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    2. Schneider G,
    3. Probst T,
    4. Kirchin MA, et al

    . Low-dose gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI of the kidney for the differential diagnosis of localized renal lesions. Radiol Med 2015 Jun 19. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1007/s11547-015-0548-7 pmid:26088468

    CrossRefPubMed