European Radiology

, Volume 28, Issue 10, pp 4128–4133 | Cite as

The inhibitory effect of gadoxetate disodium on hepatic transporters: a study using indocyanine green

  • Hiroyuki Akai
  • Koichiro Yasaka
  • Akira Kunimatsu
  • Masanori Nojima
  • Yusuke Inoue
  • Osamu Abe
  • Kuni Ohtomo
  • Shigeru KiryuEmail author
Contrast Media



To assess the inhibitory effect of gadoxetate disodium on the transporter system using indocyanine green (ICG).

Materials and Methods

Groups of six female B6 Albino mice were injected with the test agent (0.62 mmol/kg gadoxetate disodium) or phosphate-buffered saline (control) 10 min before injection of ICG. Identical fluorescence images were subsequently obtained to create time-efficiency curves of liver parenchymal uptake. The study was performed on hypothermic and normothermic mice. The logarithms of the absorption rate constants (logKa values) and of the elimination rate constants (logKe values) were calculated for each experimental condition, and between-group differences were compared using Student’s t-test.


The logKe values of the test group were lower than those of the control group at both temperatures (-6.52 vs. -5.87 under hypothermic conditions and -4.54 vs. -4.14 under normothermic conditions), and both differences were statistically significant (p = 0.037, 0.015 respectively). In terms of the logKa values, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.052), the test group had lower values than the control group under hypothermic conditions (-0.771 vs. -0.376). In normothermic mice, the logKa values for the test and control groups were 0.037 and 0.277 respectively, thus not significantly different (p = 0.404).


Gadoxetate disodium inhibited ICG excretion. Thus, gadoxetate disodium inhibited the ATP-binding cassette sub-family C member 2 transporter.

Key Points

• Gadoxetate disodium inhibited ICG excretion.

• Gadoxetate disodium tended to inhibit hepatic ICG uptake.

• Drug-drug interactions of gadoxetate disodium need further investigation.


Liver Contrast media Indocyanine green Fluorescence Multidrug resistance-associated proteins 



ATP-binding cassette sub-family C member


Fluorescence imaging


Indocyanine green


Magnetic resonance imaging


Multidrug resistance-associated protein


Na+/taurocholate transport protein


Organic anion-transporting polypeptide


Phosphate-buffered saline


Region of interest



This study has received funding by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JP16K10308).

Compliance with ethical standards


The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Shigeru Kiryu.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors (Dr. Masanori Nojima) is Master of Public Health and has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required for this study because it is an experimental study using mice.

Ethical approval

Approval from the institutional animal care committee was obtained.


• experimental

• performed at one institution


  1. 1.
    Weinmann HJ, Schuhmann-Giampieri G, Schmitt-Willich H, Vogler H, Frenzel T, Gries H (1991) A new lipophilic gadolinium chelate as a tissue-specific contrast medium for MRI. Magn Reson Med 22:233–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hamm B, Staks T, Mühler A et al (1995) Phase I clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a hepatobiliary MR contrast agent: safety, pharmacokinetics, and MR imaging. Radiology 195:785–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vogl TJ, Kümmel S, Hammerstingl R et al (1996) Liver tumors: comparison of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. Radiology 200:59–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A et al (2004) Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology 230:266–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sou H et al (2009) Liver parenchymal enhancement of hepatocyte-phase images in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging: which biological markers of the liver function affect the enhancement? J Magn Reson Imaging 30:1042–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tajima T, Takao H, Akai H et al (2010) Relationship between liver function and liver signal intensity in hepatobiliary phase of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34:362–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giraudeau C, Leporq B, Doblas S et al (2017) Gadoxetate-enhanced MR imaging and compartmental modelling to assess hepatocyte bidirectional transport function in rats with advanced liver fibrosis. Eur Radiol 27:1804–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joo I, Lee JM (2016) Recent advances in the imaging diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Liver Cancer 5:67–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akai H, Kiryu S, Ohta Y et al (2017) The natural history of streptozotocin-stimulated non-alcoholic steatohepatitis mice followed by Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI: Comparison with simple steatosis mice. Magn Reson Imaging 38:123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim YY, An C, Kim S, Kim MJ (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of prospective application of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) in gadoxetate-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Montfoort JE, Stieger B, Meijer DK, Weinmann HJ, Meier PJ, Fattinger KE (1999) Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent gadoxetate by the organic anion transporting polypeptide Oatp1. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 290:153–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kato N, Yokawa T, Tamura A, Heshiki A, Ebert W, Weinmann HJ (2002) Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid interaction with clinical drugs in rats. Investig Radiol 37:680–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akai H, Yasaka K, Nojima M, Inoue Y, Ohtomo K, Kiryu S (2017) Influence of indocyanine green on hepatic Gd-EOB-DTPA uptake: a proof-of-concept study in mice. Investig Radiol 52:441–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen WR, Adams RL, Higgins AK, Bartels KE, Nordquist RE (1996) Photothermal effects on murine mammary tumors using indocyanine green and an 808-nm diode laser: an in vivo efficacy study. Cancer Lett 98:169–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shirata C, Kaneko J, Inagaki Y et al (2017) Near-infrared photothermal/photodynamic therapy with indocyanine green induces apoptosis of hepatocellular carcinoma cells through oxidative stress. Sci Rep 7:13958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fox IJ, Brooker LG, Heseltine DW, Essex HE, Wood EH (1957) A tricarbocyanine dye for continuous recording of dilution curves in whole blood independent of variations in blood oxygen saturation. Proc Staff Meet Mayo Clin 32:478–484PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cherrick GR, Stein SW, Leevy CM, Davidson CS (1960) Indocyanine green: observations on its physical properties, plasma decay, and hepatic extraction. J Clin Invest 39:592–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kitai T, Inomoto T, Miwa M, Shikayama T (2005) Fluorescence navigation with indocyanine green for detecting sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Breast Cancer 12:211–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tajima Y, Yamazaki K, Masuda Y et al (2009) Sentinel node mapping guided by indocyanine green fluorescence imaging in gastric cancer. Ann Surg 249:58–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ishizawa T, Fukushima N, Shibahara J et al (2009) Real-time identification of liver cancers by using indocyanine green fluorescent imaging. Cancer 115:2491–2504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leonhardt M, Keiser M, Oswald S et al (2010) Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA: role of human organic anion transporters. Drug Metab Dispos 38:1024–1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    de Graaf W, Häusler S, Heger M et al (2011) Transporters involved in the hepatic uptake of (99m)Tc-mebrofenin and indocyanine green. J Hepatol 54:738–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Muhler A, Oude Elferink RP, Weinmann HJ (1993) Complete elimination of the hepatobiliary mr contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA in hepatic dysfunction: An experimental study using transport-deficient, mutant rats. MAGMA 1:134–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huang L, Vore M (2001) Multidrug resistance p-glycoprotein 2 is essential for the biliary excretion of indocyanine green. Drug Metab Dispos 29:634–637PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kiryu S, Inoue Y, Watanabe M, Ohtomo K (2011) Effect of isoflurane anesthesia and hypothermia on the hepatic kinetics of Gd-EOB-DTPA: evaluation using MRI of conscious mice. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:354–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: estimating the maximum safe starting dose in initial clinical trials for therapeutics in adult healthy volunteers. July 06, 2005. Available at: Accessed 1 Sept 2015.
  27. 27.
    Robert P, Lehericy S, Grand S et al (2015) T1-weighted hypersignal in the deep cerebellar nuclei after repeated administrations of gadolinium-based contrast agents in healthy rats: difference between linear and macrocyclic agents. Investig Radiol 50:473–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Robert P, Violas X, Grand S et al (2016) Linear gadolinium-based contrast agents are associated with brain gadolinium retention in healthy rats. Investig Radiol 51:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bussi S, Penard L, Bonafè R et al (2018) Non-clinical assessment of safety and gadolinium deposition after cumulative administration of gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance®) to neonatal and juvenile rats. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 92:268–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sano K et al (2011) Double-dose gadoxetic Acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with chronic liver disease. Investig Radiol 46:141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kinner S, Steinweg V, Maderwald S et al (2014) Bile duct evaluation of potential living liver donors with Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MR cholangiography: Single-dose, double dose or half-dose contrast enhanced imaging. Eur J Radiol 83:763–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang F, Nojima M, Inoue Y, Ohtomo K, Kiryu S (2015) Assessment of MRI contrast agent kinetics via retro-orbital injection in mice: comparison with tail vein injection. PLoS One 10:e0129326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Millard SP, Krause A (eds) (2001) Applied Statistics in the Pharmaceutical Industry: With Case Studies Using S-Plus. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jia J, Puls D, Oswald S et al (2014) Characterization of the intestinal and hepatic uptake/efflux transport of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent gadolinium-ethoxylbenzyl-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid. Investig Radiol 49:78–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kiryu S, Inoue Y, Watanabe M et al (2009) Evaluation of gadoxetate disodium as a contrast agent for mouse liver imaging: comparison with gadobenate dimeglumine. Magn Reson Imaging 27:101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Segers J, Le Duc G, Laumonier C, Troprès I, Elst LV, Muller RN (2005) Evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA uptake in a perfused and isolated mouse liver model: correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and monochromatic quantitative computed tomography. Investig Radiol 40:574–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kalliokoski A, Niemi M (2009) Impact of OATP transporters on pharmacokinetics. Br J Pharmacol 158:693–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yamazaki M, Akiyama S, Ni'inuma K, Nishigaki R, Sugiyama Y (1997) Biliary excretion of pravastatin in rats: contribution of the excretion pathway mediated by canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter. Drug Metab Dispos 25:1123–1129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vlaming ML, Pala Z, van Esch A et al (2008) Impact of Abcc2 (Mrp2) and Abcc3 (Mrp3) on the in vivo elimination of methotrexate and its main toxic metabolite 7-hydroxymethotrexate. Clin Cancer Res 14:8152–8160CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiology, Institute of Medical ScienceUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Division of Advanced Medicine Promotion, The Advanced Clinical Research Center, Institute of Medical ScienceUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic RadiologyKitasato University School of MedicineSagamiharaJapan
  4. 4.Department of Radiology, Graduate School of MedicineUniversity of TokyoTokyoJapan
  5. 5.International University of Health and WelfareTochigiJapan
  6. 6.Department of RadiologyInternational University of Health and Welfare HospitalTochigiJapan

Personalised recommendations