Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for the Differentiation of True Progression from Pseudoprogression Following Concomitant Radiotherapy with Temozolomide in Patients with Newly Diagnosed High-grade Gliomas

Academic Radiology

Volumn 19, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 1353-1361

  Lee, Woong Jae ^a   Choi, Seung Hong ^a   Park, Chul Kee ^a   Yi, Kyung Sik ^a   Kim, Tae Min ^b   Lee, Se Hoon ^b   Kim, Ji Hoon ^a   Sohn, Chul Ho ^a   Park, Sung Hye ^a   Kim, Il Han ^b  

^a Seoul National University   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Concomitant chemoradiotherapy; Diffusion weighted imaging; High grade glioma; Progression; Pseudoprogression

Indexed keywords

TEMOZOLOMIDE;

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FEMALE; GLIOMA; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION FIELD; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS, ALKYLATING; ARTIFACTS; BRAIN NEOPLASMS; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; DACARBAZINE; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; GLIOMA; HUMANS; MALE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84866936005     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: 18784046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.06.011     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Stupp R., Mason W.P., van den Bent M.J., et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005, 352:987-996.
2. Stupp R., Hegi M.E., Mason W.P., et al. Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol 2009, 10:459-466.
3. Mirimanoff R.O., Gorlia T., Mason W., et al. Radiotherapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: recursive partitioning analysis of the EORTC 26981/22981-NCIC CE3 phase III randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2006, 24:2563-2569.
4. Macdonald D.R., Cascino T.L., Schold S.C., et al. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 1990, 8:1277-1280.
5. Brandes A.A., Franceschi E., Tosoni A., et al. MGMT promoter methylation status can predict the incidence and outcome of pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:2192-2197.
6. Brandsma D., Stalpers L., Taal W., et al. Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. Lancet Oncol 2008, 9:453-461.
7. Chamberlain M.C., Glantz M.J., Chalmers L., et al. Early necrosis following concurrent Temodar and radiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 2007, 82:81-83.
8. de Wit M.C., de Bruin H.G., Eijkenboom W., et al. Immediate post-radiotherapy changes in malignant glioma can mimic tumor progression. Neurology 2004, 63:535-537.
9. Taal W., Brandsma D., de Bruin H.G., et al. Incidence of early pseudo-progression in a cohort of malignant glioma patients treated with chemoirradiation with temozolomide. Cancer 2008, 113:405-410.
10. Hoffman W.F., Levin V.A., Wilson C.B. Evaluation of malignant glioma patients during the postirradiation period. J Neurosurgery 1979, 50:624-628.
11. Chamberlain M.C. Pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:4359.
12. Wen P.Y., Macdonald D.R., Reardon D.A., et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:1963-1972.
13. Thon N., Eigenbrod S., Grasbon-Frodl E.M., et al. Predominant influence of MGMT methylation in non-resectable glioblastoma after radiotherapy plus temozolomide. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2011, 82:441-446.
14. Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature 2008, 455:1061-1068. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network.
15. Bjornerud A. The ICE software package: direct co-registration of anatomical and functional datasets using DICOM image geometry information. Proc Hum Brain Mapping 2003, 19:1018.
16. Pope W.B., Young J.R., Ellingson B.M. Advances in MRI assessment of gliomas and response to anti-VEGF therapy. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2011, 11:336-344.
17. Dhermain F.G., Hau P., Lanfermann H., et al. Advanced MRI and PET imaging for assessment of treatment response in patients with gliomas. Lancet Neurol 2010, 9:906-920.
18. Padhani A.R., Liu G., Koh D.M., et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 2009, 11:102-125.
19. Lam W.W., Poon W.S., Metreweli C. Diffusion MR imaging in glioma: does it have any role in the pre-operation determination of grading of glioma?. Clin Radiol 2002, 57:219-225.
20. Sugahara T., Korogi Y., Kochi M., et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 9:53-60.
21. Guo A.C., Cummings T.J., Dash R.C., et al. Lymphomas and high-grade astrocytomas: comparison of water diffusibility and histologic characteristics. Radiology 2002, 224:177-183.
22. Hayashida Y., Hirai T., Morishita S., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of metastatic brain tumors: comparison with histologic type and tumor cellularity. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006, 27:1419-1425.
23. Herneth A.M., Guccione S., Bednarski M. Apparent diffusion coefficient: a quantitative parameter for in vivo tumor characterization. Eur J Radiol 2003, 45:208-213.
24. Asao C., Korogi Y., Kitajima M., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of radiation-induced brain injury for differentiation from tumor recurrence. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005, 26:1455-1460.
25. Hein P.A., Eskey C.J., Dunn J.F., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the follow-up of treated high-grade gliomas: tumor recurrence versus radiation injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004, 25:201-209.
26. Matsusue E., Fink J.R., Rockhill J.K., et al. Distinction between glioma progression and post-radiation change by combined physiologic MR imaging. Neuroradiology 2010, 52:297-306.
27. Zeng Q.S., Li C.F., Liu H., et al. Distinction between recurrent glioma and radiation injury using magnetic resonance spectroscopy in combination with diffusion-weighted imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007, 68:151-158.
28. Kong D.S., Kim S.T., Kim E.H., et al. Diagnostic dilemma of pseudoprogression in the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastomas: the role of assessing relative cerebral blood flow volume and oxygen-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation status. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011, 32:382-387.
29. Gahramanov S., Raslan A.M., Muldoon L.L., et al. Potential for differentiation of pseudoprogression from true tumor progression with dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using ferumoxytol vs. gadoteridol: a pilot study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 79:514-523.
30. Tsien C., Galban C.J., Chenevert T.L., et al. Parametric response map as an imaging biomarker to distinguish progression from pseudoprogression in high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:2293-2299.