Innovative Journal of Medical Imaging Logo

Innovative Journal of Medical Imaging

Published by SPJ Publication

eISSN: 3048-5568

Review Article

Clinical Utility of Quantitative MRI Biomarkers in Disease Progression Assessment

Authors: Kallal Das

Article Metrics
29
Views
17
Downloads
Altmetric

Abstract

Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a powerful tool for assessing disease progression by providing objective, reproducible, and biologically meaningful biomarkers. Unlike conventional qualitative MRI, quantitative techniques generate measurable parameters that reflect underlying tissue microstructure, physiology, and metabolism, enabling earlier and more sensitive detection of pathological changes. This narrative review summarizes current evidence on the role of quantitative MRI biomarkers in monitoring disease progression across neurological, oncological, musculoskeletal, and cardiovascular conditions. Key techniques discussed include T1 and T2 mapping, diffusion MRI metrics such as apparent diffusion coefficient and fractional anisotropy, perfusion MRI parameters, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy–based metabolic markers. The review highlights how these biomarkers correlate with clinical outcomes, track longitudinal changes, and often identify disease progression earlier than standard imaging. Clinical applications, strengths, and limitations of each technique are discussed in simple and practical terms, with emphasis on their translational value in routine practice and research. Challenges related to standardization, inter-scanner variability, and integration into clinical workflows are also addressed. Overall, quantitative MRI biomarkers represent an important advancement in imaging, offering improved disease monitoring, better treatment response assessment, and enhanced support for personalized patient care.

Keywords: Quantitative MRI, Imaging Biomarkers, Disease Progression, Diffusion MRI


Article Information
DOI: 10.62502/ijmi/v2i4art4
Journal: Innovative Journal of Medical Imaging
Abbreviation: Innov. J. Med. Imaging
ISSN (Online): 3048-5568
Volume/Issue: 2(4)
Pages: 12-17

References
  1. Tofts PS. Quantitative MRI of the brain: measuring changes caused by disease. Chichester: Wiley; 2003. doi:10.1002/0470869526
  2. Cercignani M, Dowell NG, Tofts PS. Quantitative MRI of the brain: principles of physical measurement. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2018. doi:10.1201/9781315363216
  3. Filippi M, Rocca MA. MR imaging of multiple sclerosis. Radiology. 2011;259(3):659–81. doi:10.1148/radiol.11101362
  4. Alexander AL, Lee JE, Lazar M, Field AS. Diffusion tensor imaging of the brain. Neurotherapeutics. 2007;4(3):316–29. doi:10.1016/j.nurt.2007.05.011
  5. Le Bihan D. Diffusion MRI: what water tells us about the brain. EMBO Mol Med. 2014;6(5):569–73. doi:10.1002/emmm.201404055
  6. Assaf Y, Pasternak O. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI)-based white matter mapping in brain research. J Mol Neurosci. 2008;34(1):51–61. doi:10.1007/s12031-007-0029-0 Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer
  7. biomarker. Radiology. 2009;254(3):647–64. doi:10.1148/radiol.09090548
  8. Tofts PS, Kermode AG. Measurement of the blood–brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1991;17(2):357–67. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910170208
  9. Sourbron SP, Buckley DL. Tracer kinetic modelling in MRI: estimating perfusion and capillary permeability. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57(2):R1–33. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/2/R1
  10. Rosen BR, Belliveau JW, Vevea JM, Brady TJ. Perfusion imaging with NMR contrast agents. Magn Reson Med. 1990;14(2):249–65. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910140208
  11. Moonen CT, Sobering G, Van Zijl PC, Gillen J. Proton spectroscopic imaging of human brain. J Magn Reson. 1992;98(3):556–75. doi:10.1016/0022-2364(92)90045-O
  12. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures. Radiology. 2016;278(2):563–77. doi:10.1148/radiol.2015151169
  13. Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, et al. Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(4):441–6. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2011.11.036
  14. Maier SE, Sun Y, Mulkern RV. Diffusion imaging of brain tumors. NMR Biomed. 2010;23(7):849–64. doi:10.1002/nbm.1544
  15. van Everdingen KJ, van der Grond J, Kappelle LJ, Ramos LM, Mali WP. Diffusion-weighted MRI in acute stroke. Stroke. 1998;29(9):1783–90. doi:10.1161/01.STR.29.9.1783
  16. Essig M, Shiroishi MS, Nguyen TB, et al. Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked questions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(1):24–34. doi:10.2214/AJR.12.9543
  17. Miller KL, Donahue MJ, Smith AM, et al. ASL perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2013;69(2):334–44. doi:10.1002/mrm.24367
  18. Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F, et al. Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(2):162–73. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2
  19. Tustison NJ, Avants BB, Cook PA, et al. N4ITK: improved N3 bias correction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010;29(6):1310–20. doi:10.1109/TMI.2010.2046908
  20. Ashburner J, Friston KJ. Voxel-based morphometry. Neuroimage. 2000;11(6):805–21. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0582
  21. Bauer CM, Jara H, Killiany R. Whole brain quantitative T2 mapping. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;32(4):1024–33. doi:10.1002/jmri.22306
  22. Warntjes JB, Dahlqvist O, Lundberg P. Novel method for rapid quantitative MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2007;57(3):528–37. doi:10.1002/mrm.21165
  23. Ma D, Gulani V, Seiberlich N, et al. Magnetic resonance fingerprinting. Nature. 2013;495(7440):187–92. doi:10.1038/nature11971
  24. Koo BB, Kim DI, Kim DJ. Quantitative susceptibility mapping in neurological diseases. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;36(4):776–86. doi:10.1002/jmri.23618
  25. Haacke EM, Liu S, Buch S, et al. Quantitative susceptibility mapping. Magn Reson Med. 2015;73(1):82–101. doi:10.1002/mrm.25383
  26. Law M, Yang S, Wang H, et al. Glioma grading using perfusion and diffusion MRI. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24(10):1989–98.
  27. Prezzi D, Owens C, Goh V. Imaging colorectal cancer liver metastases. Br J Radiol. 2018;91(1081):20170531. doi:10.1259/bjr.20170531
  28. Pope WB, Kim HJ, Huo J, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient changes. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(3):552–8. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1407
  29. O’Connor JP, Aboagye EO, Adams JE, et al. Imaging biomarker roadmap. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017;14(3):169–86. doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.162
  30. Poldrack RA, Mumford JA, Nichols TE. Handbook of functional MRI data analysis. Cambridge: CUP; 2011. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511895029
  31. Choi YS, Lee HJ, Ahn SS, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging for tumor progression. Radiology. 2014;273(3):831–40. doi:10.1148/radiol.14140140
  32. Gillard JH, Waldman AD, Barker PB. Clinical MR neuroimaging. Cambridge: CUP; 2010. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511780295
  33. Mabray MC, Barajas RF Jr, Cha S. Modern brain tumor imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(9):1626–41. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4261
  34. Thust SC, van den Bent MJ, Smits M. Pseudoprogression of brain tumors. Neuro Oncol. 2018;20(1):23–35. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nox113
  35. O’Connor JPB, Jackson A, Parker GJM, Jayson GC. DCE-MRI biomarkers. Br J Cancer. 2007;96(2):189–95. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603515
How to Cite
Vancouver Style:
Das K. Clinical Utility of Quantitative MRI Biomarkers in Disease Progression Assessment. Innov. J. Med. Imaging 2025;2(4):12-17. doi: 10.62502/ijmi/v2i4art4