ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2024
Nuclear Overhauser enhancement imaging at -1.6 ppm in rat brain at 4.7T.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Denoising Low-Power CEST Imaging Using a Deep Learning Approach With a Dual-Power Feature Preparation Strategy.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- Toward quantitative CEST imaging of glutamate in the mouse brain using a multi-pool exchange model calibrated byMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Improving quantification accuracy of a nuclear Overhauser enhancement signal at -1.6 ppm at 4.7 T using a machine learning approach.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- A Denoising Convolutional Autoencoder for SNR Enhancement in Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer imaging: (DCAE-CEST).bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeA new nuclear Overhauser enhancement (NOE)-mediated saturation transfer signal at around -1.6 ppm, termed NOE(-1.6), has been reported at high fields of 7T and 9.4T previously. This study aims to validate the presence of this signal at a relatively low field of 4.7T and evaluate its variations in different brain regions and tumors.
methodsRats were injected with monocrystalline iron oxide nanoparticles to reduce the NOE(-1.6) signal. CEST signals were measured using different saturation powers before and after injection to assess the presence of this signal. Multiple-pool Lorentzian fits, with/without inclusion of the NOE(-1.6) pool, were performed on CEST Z-spectra obtained from healthy rat brains and rats with 9L tumors. These fits aimed to further validate the presence of the NOE(-1.6) signal and quantify its amplitude.
resultsThe NOE(-1.6) signal exhibited a dramatic change following the injection of monocrystalline iron oxide nanoparticles, confirming its presence at 4.7T. The NOE(-1.6) signal reached its peak at a saturation power of ∼0.75 μT, indicating an optimized power level. The multiple-pool Lorentzian fit without the NOE(-1.6) pool showed higher residuals around -1.6 ppm compared to the fit with this pool, further supporting the presence of this signal. The NOE(-1.6) signal did not exhibit significant variation in the corpus callosum and caudate putamen regions, but it showed a significant decrease in tumors, which aligns with previous findings at 9.4T.
conclusionThis study successfully demonstrated the presence of the NOE(-1.6) signal at 4.7T, which provides valuable insights into its potential applications at lower field strengths.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.