Field strength–dependent sensitivity of chemical exchange saturation transfer: a methodological comparison of 3 Tesla and 7 Tesla in a clinical cohort
Clicks: 3
ID: 319058
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
0.6
/100
3 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #54 of 116 articles by views in Brain communications
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) MRI provides insight into tissue metabolism by detecting low-concentration endogenous molecules. While studies at 7 Tesla (7T) have shown enhanced sensitivity and spectral separation, 3 Tesla (3T) remains the clinical standard, and the relative performance of these field strengths in a direct clinical head-to-head comparison remains unclear. This prospective cohort study provides a direct within-subject comparison of multi-pool CEST imaging at 3T and 7T, using age-related tissue changes and glioma molecular subtypes as representative applications of physiological and pathological CEST sensitivity. Forty-three patients (ages 18–76; 18 female) underwent 3T and 7T CEST MRI prior to surgery due to suspected brain tumor; following quality control, 36 datasets were included at 3T and 32 at 7T. CEST amplitudes from amide, amine, aliphatic relayed nuclear Overhauser effect (rNOE), and magnetization transfer pools were quantified in white matter, gray matter, deep gray matter, and tumor tissue. A physics-informed conditional autoencoder (PICAE) was applied at 7T to correct B1 inhomogeneity. Age effects were tested using linear regression; tumor subtype differences were tested using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. The significance level was set to α = 0.05, and the Holm-Bonferroni procedure was applied to correct for multiple testing. At 7T, amide and rNOE showed robust negative correlations with age in gray matter and deep gray matter, supporting the potential of CEST as an aging biomarker. Age dependence at 3T was weaker, limited to rNOE (gray matter and deep gray matter) and magnetization transfer (white matter and deep gray matter). In contrast, tumor CEST metrics showed no significant age dependence at either field strength. Trends in relative amide contrast were consistent with prior findings but did not reach statistical significance. Sensitivity to tumor molecular subtype was similar across field strengths. Variability analyses showed that conventional 7T processing introduced higher technical variability than 3T, whereas PICAE substantially reduced variability and improved data quality at 7T. In conclusion, 7T CEST MRI demonstrates higher potential as a non-invasive marker of brain aging whereas our simplified pipeline did not yield additional information for tumor subtyping at either field strength. These findings underscore both the enhanced sensitivity and the higher technical demands of 7T, and highlight the importance of advanced correction strategies such as PICAE for robust use of single-transmit 7T CEST.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7166552870
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Milena Capiglioni, Moritz Fabian, Stefanie Marti, Richard McKinley, Robert Hoepner, Alejandro León Betancourt, Johannes Slotboom, Roland Wiest, Moritz Zaiß, A Mennecke, Piotr Radojewski |
| Journal | Brain communications |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/braincomms/fcag248
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.