ADC and FA were calculated pixel-by-pixel according to the conventional mono-exponential model from part of the q-space Navitoclax order data, b-values of 0 and 1116 s/mm2, because these data included multiple b-value

data. Next, the full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the probability density function (PDF) was calculated as previously described [8] and [24]. Briefly, the key principle in q-space analysis is that a Fourier transform of the signal attenuation with regard to q provides the PDF for diffusion by using multiple q-values [17]. The shape of the computed PDF can be characterized by the FWHM and the maximum height of the curve. In the condition of unrestricted Gaussian diffusion, the diffusion constant D and the RMSD for one-dimensional diffusion can be computed from the FWHM. Mean RMSD was calculated from the FWHM values (RMSD = 0.425 × FWHM) [16] and [17]. By referring

to conventional MR images, two experienced neuroradiologists (M.Y. and M.H.) manually placed ovoid region of interests (ROIs) on b = 0 QSI data by using dTV II FZR and Volume-One 1.81 software (Image Computing and Analysis Laboratory, Department of Radiology, The University of Tokyo Selleckchem Lenvatinib Hospital). ROIs were drawn in plaques (defined as areas of abnormally high signal intensity on the b = 0 q-space image), periplaque white matter (PWM; defined as a white-matter area that had normal signal intensity and was closest to a plaque), and NAWM (defined as an area of WM with normal signal intensity that was contralateral to a plaque; Fig. 1) [1]. The dTV II FZR software allowed for copying of Exoribonuclease the ROIs and guaranteed the evaluation of the same region with diffusion metric maps. The average FA, ADC, and FWHM values in each ROI were measured; areas with severe signal loss or calculation errors were excluded from analysis. The three areas (plaques, PWM, and NAWM) were compared according to the Steel–Dwass test for multiple comparisons by using the statistical software package R (Version 2.8.1). A P value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference. Interrater reliability was assessed by using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

Data from all 22 patients were included in the evaluation, without fatal image degeneration or artifacts. Fig. 2 shows representative b = 0 DTI image (echo-planar T2-weighted image), FA, and ADC maps generated by using conventional DTI data, and an RMSD map created from QSI data. All plaques yielded low values on FA maps and high values on both RMSD and ADC maps. Reproducibility was expressed in terms of the interrater correlation coefficient; the coefficient was 0.86 for the ADC analysis, 0.79 for the FA analysis, and 0.94 for the RMSD analysis. ADC values (mean ± 1 SD) for plaques, PWM, and NAWM were 0.640 ± 0.116, 0.545 ± 0.091, 0.490 ± 0.043 (10− 3 mm2/s), respectively. FA values for plaques, PWM, and NAWM were 0.271 ± 0.072, 0.