Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Purpose</h3><p>Chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) is an MRI technique sensitive to the presence of low‐concentration solute protons exchanging with water. However, magnetization transfer (MT) effects also arise when large semisolid molecules interact with water, which biases CEST parameter estimates if quantitative models do not account for macromolecular effects. This study establishes under what conditions this bias is significant and demonstrates how using an appropriate model provides more accurate quantitative CEST measurements.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>CEST and MT data were acquired in phantoms containing bovine serum albumin and agarose. Several quantitative CEST and MT models were used with the phantom data to demonstrate how underfitting can influence estimates of the CEST effect. CEST and MT data were acquired in healthy volunteers, and a two‐pool model was fit in vivo and in vitro, whereas removing increasing amounts of CEST data to show biases in the CEST analysis also corrupts MT parameter estimates.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>When all significant CEST/MT effects were included, the derived parameter estimates for each CEST/MT pool significantly correlated (<i>P</i> < .05) with bovine serum albumin/agarose concentration; minimal or negative correlations were found with underfitted data. Additionally, a bootstrap analysis demonstrated that significant biases occur in MT parameter estimates (<i>P</i> < .001) when unmodeled CEST data are included in the analysis. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusions</h3><p>These results indicate that current practices of simultaneously fitting both CEST and MT effects in model‐based analyses can lead to significant bias in all parameter estimates unless a sufficiently detailed model is utilized. Therefore, care must be taken when quantifying CEST and MT effects in vivo by properly modeling data to minimize these biases.</p></section>

A geometric approach to separate the effects of magnetic susceptibility and chemical shift/exchange in a phantom with isotropic magnetic susceptibility

Clinical Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM): Biometal Imaging and Its Emerging Roles in Patient Care

Abstract WP292: Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Reliably Measuring Hematoma Volume in Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Susceptibility Source Separation with Adaptive Relaxometric Constant Estimation (QSM-ARCS) from Solely Gradient-Echo Data

Magnetic Susceptibility Source Separation Solely from Gradient Echo Data: Histological Validation

Simultaneous Phase Unwrapping and Removal of Chemical Shift (spurs) Using Graph Cuts: Application in Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping

APART-QSM: an improved sub-voxel quantitative susceptibility mapping for susceptibility source separation using an iterative data fitting method

Investigating the effect of oblique image acquisition on the accuracy of QSM and a robust tilt correction method

[Research Progress of Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in MRI].

MoG-QSM: Model-based Generative Adversarial Deep Learning Network for Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping.

Quantification of susceptibility change at high-concentrated SPIO-labeled target by characteristic phase gradient recognition

Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping of Human Brain Reflects Spatial Variation in Tissue Composition

Brief overview of principles and methods of quantitative susceptibility mapping

A method for estimating and removing streaking artifacts in quantitative susceptibility mapping

Reducing the object orientation dependence of susceptibility effects in gradient echo MRI through quantitative susceptibility mapping.

MRI Tissue Magnetism Quantification through Total Field Inversion with Deep Neural Networks

Characterization of Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in the Left Ventricle of the Myocardium

Dipole Incompatibility Related Artifacts in Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping

Does the magnetization transfer effect bias chemical exchange saturation transfer effects? Quantifying chemical exchange saturation transfer in the presence of magnetization transfer

Verification of Quantification of Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Estimating the Amount of Gadolinium Deposited in the Brain: a Preliminary Phantom Study

Incorporating the effect of white matter microstructure in the estimation of magnetic susceptibility in ex-vivo mouse brain