Does Age Interfere With Gadolinium Toxicity and Presence in Brain and Bone Tissues?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The main objective of the study was to assess the effect of age on target tissue total gadolinium (Gd) retention after repeated administration of gadodiamide (linear) or gadoterate (macrocyclic) Gd-based contrast agent (GBCA) in rats. The secondary objective was to assess the potential developmental and long-term consequences of GBCA administration during neonatal and juvenile periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 20 equivalent human clinical doses (cumulated dose, 12 mmol Gd/kg) of either gadoterate or gadodiamide were administered concurrently by the intravenous route to healthy adult and juvenile rats. Saline was administered to juvenile rats forming the control group. In juvenile rats, the doses were administered from postnatal day 12, that is, once the blood-brain barrier is functional as in humans after birth. The tests were conducted on 5 juvenile rats per sex and per group and on 3 adult animals per sex and per group. T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the cerebellum was performed at 4.7 T during both the treatment and treatment-free periods. Behavioral tests were performed in juvenile rats. Rats were euthanatized at 11 to 12 weeks (ie, approximately 3 months) after the last administration. Total Gd concentrations were measured in plasma, skin, bone, and brain by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Cerebellum samples from the juvenile rats were characterized by histopathological examination (including immunohistochemistry for glial fibrillary acidic protein or GFAP, and CD68). Lipofuscin pigments were also studied by fluorescence microscopy. All tests were performed blindly on randomized animals. RESULTS: Transient skin lesions were observed in juvenile rats (5/5 females and 2/4 males) and not in adult rats having received gadodiamide. Persisting (up to completion of the study) T1 hyperintensity in the deep cerebellar nuclei (DCNs) was observed only in gadodiamide-treated rats. Quantitatively, a slightly higher progressive increase in the DCN/brain stem ratio was observed in adult rats compared with juvenile rats, whereas no difference was noted visually. In all tissues, total Gd concentrations were higher (10- to 30-fold higher) in the gadodiamide-treated groups than in the gadoterate groups. No age-related differences were observed except in bone marrow where total Gd concentrations in gadodiamide-treated juvenile rats were higher than those measured in adults and similar to those measured in cortical bone tissue. No significant treatment-related effects were observed in histopathological findings or in development, behavior, and biochemistry parameters. However, in the elevated plus maze test, a trend toward an anxiogenic effect was observed in the gadodiamide group compared with other groups (nonsignificant). Moreover, in the balance beam test, a high number of trials were excluded in the gadodiamide group because rats (mainly males) did not completely cross the beam, which may also reflect an anxiogenic effect. CONCLUSIONS: No T1 hyperintensity was observed in the DCN after administration of the macrocyclic GBCA gadoterate regardless of age as opposed to administration of the linear GBCA gadodiamide. Repeated administration of gadodiamide in neonatal and juvenile rats resulted in similar total Gd retention in the skin, brain, and bone to that in adult rats with sex having no effect, whereas Gd distribution in bone marrow was influenced by age. Further studies are required to assess the form of the retained Gd and to investigate the potential risks associated with Gd retention in bone marrow in juvenile animals treated with gadodiamide. Regardless of age, total Gd concentration in the brain and bone was 10- to 30-fold higher after administration of gadodiamide compared with gadoterate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".