Published January 2013 | Version v1
Journal article

Cerebral neoplastic enhancing lesions: Multicenter, randomized, crossover intraindividual comparison between gadobutrol (1.0 M) and gadoterate meglumine (0.5 M) at 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight in a clinical setting

  • 1. Department of Neuroradiology, Scientific Institute H.S. Raffaele, Via Olgettina 60, 20132 Milan (Italy)
  • 2. "L. Bonomo" Hospital Center, Viale Istria 1, 70031 Andria (Italy)
  • 3. U.O.C. Neuroimaging and Neurointerventional, "Santa Maria alle Scotte" Polyclinic, Viale Bracci 16, 53100 Siena (Italy)
  • 4. Cannizzaro Hospital, Via Messina, 829, 98125 Catania (Italy)
  • 5. Institute for Advanced Biomedical Techniques, Clinical Sciences and Bioimaging Dept., G.D'Annunzio University, Via dei Vestini, 66100 Chieti (Italy)
  • 6. University Scientific Institute, San Raffaele Hospital, Via Olgettina 60, 20090 Milano (Italy)
  • 7. Maggiore Borgo Trento City Hospital, Piazzale Stefani 1, 37126 Verona (Italy)
  • 8. Dept. of Diagnostic and Molecular Imaging, UOC of Neuroradiology, Tor Vergata Polyclinics, Viale Oxford 81, 00133 Roma (Italy)
  • 9. "Maggiore della Carità" University Hospital, Corso Mazzini, 18, 28100 Novara (Italy)
  • 10. "G. Martino" University Polyclinic, Via Consolare Valeria, 1, 98125 Messina (Italy)
  • 11. Second University Hospital c/o CTO, Viale Colli Aminei, 21, 80131 Napoli (Italy)

Description

Objective: Two macrocyclic extracellular contrast agents, one-molar neutral gadobutrol and ionic gadoterate meglumine, were compared to determine the overall preference for one or the other in a clinical setting. Materials and methods: Multicenter, randomized, single-blind, intra-individually controlled, comparison study with a corresponding blinded read. Efficacy analysis was based on 136 patients who underwent identical MRI examinations: group A first received 1.0 M gadobutrol followed by 0.5 M gadoterate meglumine 48 h to 7 days later; group B had a reversed administration order. Three independent blinded readers assessed off-site their overall diagnostic preference (primary efficacy parameter) based on a matched pairs approach. Results: Superiority of gadobutrol over gadoterate meglumine was demonstrated for the qualitative assessment of overall preference across all readers by a statistically significant difference between both contrast agents for this primary endpoint. Preferences in lesion enhancement (secondary endpoint) were also found significantly in favor of gadobutrol. For preference in lesion delineation from surrounding tissue/edema and for internal structure only a trend towards a higher proportion for gadobutrol was found (except for internal structure reported by one reader, which showed a result of statistical significance). Lesion contrast and relative lesion enhancement (quantitative parameters) were statistically significantly higher for gadobutrol compared to gadoterate meglumine. Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced MRI of neoplastic brain lesions at a dose of 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight, assessed in a standardized off-site blinded reading, results in a significantly higher qualitative and quantitative preference for gadobutrol compared to gadoterate meglumine

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.07.005

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.07.005;
PII
S0720-048X(11)00622-X;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
European Journal of Radiology
Journal Volume
82
Journal Issue
1
Journal Page Range
p. 139-145
ISSN
0720-048X
CODEN
EJRADR

INIS

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2011 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.