Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gadobutrol: A Review of Its Use for Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Adults and Children

  • Adis Drug Evaluation
  • Published:
Clinical Drug Investigation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since the introduction of the first gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA) approximately 25 years ago, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using GBCAs has revolutionized diagnostic and follow-up imaging of pathological lesions, with clinical applications expanded to encompass almost all fields of medicine. Intravenous gadobutrol (Gadovist™ [EU]; Gadavist® [USA]) is a second-generation extracellular non-ionic macrocyclic GBCA that is used in patients undergoing diagnostic contrast-enhanced MRI for visualization of pathological lesions in the CNS and all other body regions or for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) to evaluate perfusion and flow-related abnormalities. Its unique physicochemical profile, along with the high thermostability of macrocyclic GBCAs, means gadobutrol is formulated at twice the gadolinium ion concentration of other currently licensed GBCAs. This reduces the injection volume and provides a narrower bolus, thereby improving image enhancement. Based on extensive clinical experience in a broad range of patients, including paediatric and adult patients (younger and elderly adults), and those with moderate to severe hepatic or renal impairment or cardiovascular disorders, gadobutrol is an effective and generally well tolerated extracellular GBCA for patients undergoing diagnostic contrast-enhanced MRI and contrast-enhanced MRA. As with all macrocyclic GBCAs, the potential for gadobutrol to cause nephrogenic systemic fibrosis appears to be lower than with linear GBCAs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig.1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anzalone N. Defining contrast: latest data on the safety of gadobutrol-enhanced MRI and efficacy in CNS applications. EJHP Pract. 2011;17(5):31–4.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Engelhorn T, Doerfler A. High-molar contrast agents for CNS application. Imag Decisions. 2008;11(4):26–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gutierrez JE, Koenig S, Breuer J. Overview on the efficacy and safety of gadbutrol: an MRI contrast agent for the CNS, body and vessels. Imaging Med. 2012;4(1):25–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bellin MF, Vasile M, Morel-Precetti S. Currently used non-specific extracellular MR contrast media. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(12):2688–98.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wollanka H, Weidenmaier W, Giersig C. NSF after Gadovist exposure: a case report and hypothesis of NSF development. Nephrol Dial Transpl. 2009;24(12):3882–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Frenzel T, Lengsfeld P, Schirmer H, et al. Stability of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents in human serum at 37 °C. Invest Radiol. 2008;43(12):817–28.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Huppertz A, Rohrer M. Gadobutrol, a highly concentrated MR-imaging contrast agent: its physicochemical characteristics and the basis for its use in contrast-enhanced MR angiography and perfusion imaging. Eur Radiol. 2004;14 Suppl. 5:M12–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tombach B, Heindel W. Value of 1.0- M gadolinium chelates: review of preclinical and clinical data on gadobutrol. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(6):1550–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, et al. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol. 2005;40(11):715–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. Gadavist (gadobutrol) injection, for intravenous use: US prescribing information. 2011. http://www.bayerresources.com.au/resources/uploads/PI/file9345.pdf. Accessed 3 Dec 2012.

  11. Staks T, Schuhmann-Giampieri G, Frenzel T, et al. Pharmacokinetics, dose proportionality, and tolerability of gadobutrol after single intravenous injection in healthy volunteers. Invest Radiol. 1994;29(7):709–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kramer JH, Arnoldi E, Francois CJ, et al. Dynamic and static magnetic resonance angiography of the supra-aortic vessels at 3.0 T. Invest Radiol. 2013;48(3):121–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. European Medicines Agency. Summary of product characteristics, labelling and package leaflet: Gadovist 1.0 mmol/mL solution for injection. 2012. http://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/medicine/9553. Accessed 23 Nov 2012.

  14. Sieber MA, Lengsfeld P, Frenzel T, et al. Preclinical investigation to compare different gadolinium-based contrast agents regarding their propensity to release gadolinium in vivo and to trigger nephrogenic systemic fibrosis-like lesions. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(10):2164–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sieber MA, Pietsch H, Walter J, et al. A preclinical study to investigate the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a possible role for gadolinium-based contrast media. Invest Radiol. 2008;43(1):65–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Voth M, Rosenberg M, Breuer J. Safety of gadobutrol, a new generation of contrast agents: experience from clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance. Invest Radiol. 2011;46(11):663–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hahn G, Sorge I, Gruhn B, et al. Pharmacokinetics and safety of gadobutrol-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(12):776–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Pharmacokinetics of 1 M gadobutrol in patients with chronic renal failure. Invest Radiol. 2000;35(1):35–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Using highly concentrated gadobutrol as an MR contrast agent in patients also requiring hemodialysis: safety and dialysability. Am J Roentgen. 2002;178(1):105–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Benner T, Reimer P, Erb G, et al. Cerebral MR perfusion imaging: first clinical application of a 1 M gadolinium chelate (Gadovist 1.0) in a double-blinded randomized dose-finding study. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;12(3):371–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bhargava R, Noga M. Safety and efficacy of gadobutrol-enhanced MRI in patients aged under 2 years: a single-center, observational study. Magnet Reson Insights. 2013;6:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Anzalone N, Scarabino T, Venturi C, et al. Cerebral neoplastic enhancing lesions: multicenter, randomized, crossover intraindividual comparison between gadobutrol (1.0 M) and gadoterate meglumine (0.5 M) at 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight in a clinical setting. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(1):139–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Katakami N, Inaba Y, Sugata S, et al. Magnetic resonance evaluation of brain metastases from systemic malignances with two doses of gadobutrol 1.0 M compared with gadoteridol: a multicenter, phase II/III study in patients with known or suspected brain metastases. Invest Radiol. 2011;46(7):411–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hammerstingl R, Adam G, Ayuso J-R, et al. Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in five hundred seventy-two patients with known or suspected liver lesions: results of a multicenter, double-blind, interindividual, randomized clinical phase-III trial. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(3):168–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tombach B, Bohndorf K, Brodtrager W, et al. Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI in 471 patients with known or suspected renal lesions: results of a multicenter, single-blind, interindividual, randomized clinical phase III trial. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(11):2610–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pediconi F, Kubik-Huch R, Chilla B, et al. Intra-individual randomised comparison of gadobutrol 1.0 M versus gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M in patients scheduled for preoperative breast MRI. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(1):84–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hentsch A, Aschauer MA, Balzer JO, et al. Gadobutrol-enhanced moving-table magnetic resonance angiography in patients with peripheral vascular disease: a prospective, multi-centre blinded comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(9):2103–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schaefer FKW, Schaefer PJ, Altjohann C, et al. A multicenter, site-independent, blinded study to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography using 1.0 M gadobutrol (Gadovist™) to intraarterial digital subtraction angiography in body arteries. Eur J Radiol. 2007;61(2):315–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Forsting M, Palkowitsch P. Prevalence of acute adverse reactions to gadobutrol—a highly concentrated macrocyclic gadolinium chelate: review of 14,299 patients from observational trials. Eur J Radiol. 2010;74(3):e186–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Palkowitsch P, Voth M. Summary of the safety data for gadobutrol and gadofosveset. Eur Radiol. 2009;18 Suppl. 5:E47–54.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Elmholdt TR, Jorgensen B, Ramsing M, et al. Two cases of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis after exposure to the macrocyclic compound gadobutrol. NDT Plus. 2010;3:285–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Dillman JR, Ellis JH, Cohan RH, et al. Frequency and severity of acute allergic-like reactions to gadolinium-containing IV contrast media in children and adults. Am J Roentgen. 2007;189(6):1533–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Renal tolerance of a neutral gadolinium chelate (gadobutrol) in patients with chronic renal failure: results of a randomized study. Radiology. 2001;218(3):651–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Balzer JO, Loewe C, Davis K, et al. Safety of contrast-enhanced MR angiography employing gadobutrol 1.0 M as contrast material. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(9):2067–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Moriarty JM, Finn JP, Fonseca CG. Contrast agents used in cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: current issues and future directions. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2010;10(4):227–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Anonymous. What is an MRI scan and what can it do? Drugs Ther Bull. 2011;49(12):141–44.

  37. Miller DH, Altmann DR, Chard DT. Advances in imaging to support the development of novel therapies for multiple sclerosis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012;91(4):621–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Filippi M, Rocca MA, De Stefano N, et al. Magnetic resonance techniques in multiple sclerosis: the present and the future. Arch Neurol. 2011;68(12):1514–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Essig M, Anzalone N, Combs SE, et al. MR imaging of neoplastic central nervous system lesions: review and recommendations for current practice. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(5):803–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Lovblad KO, Anzalone N, Dorfler A, et al. MR imaging in multiple sclerosis: review and recommendations for current practice. Am J Neuroradiol. 2010;31(6):983–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pennell DJ. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation. 2010;121(5):692–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Holloway BJ, Rosewarne D, Jones RG. Imaging of thoracic aortic disease. Br J Radiol. 2011;84(3):S338–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

The preparation of this review was not supported by any external funding. During the peer review process, the manufacturer of the contrast agent under review was offered an opportunity to comment on the article. Changes resulting from comments received were made by the author based on their scientific and editorial merit.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Adis, 41 Centorian Drive, Private Bag 65901, Mairangi Bay, North Shore, 0754, Auckland, New Zealand

    Lesley J. Scott

Authors
  1. Lesley J. Scott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lesley J. Scott.

Additional information

The manuscript was reviewed by: S.C.A.M. Bekkers, Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of Cardiology, Maastricht, The Netherlands; L. Correira, Maternity Dr. Alfredo da Costa-Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal; M. Rengo, Sapienza University of Rome, Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, Rome, Italy; S. Serin, University Hospital Essen, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Essen, Germany.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scott, L.J. Gadobutrol: A Review of Its Use for Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Adults and Children. Clin Drug Investig 33, 303–314 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-013-0066-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-013-0066-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation