Pattern analysis of dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging demonstrates peritumoral tissue heterogeneity

Radiology

Volumn 273, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 502-510

  Akbari, Hamed ^a   Macyszyn, Luke ^a   Da, Xiao ^a   Wolf, Ronald L ^a   Bilello, Michel ^a   Verma, Ragini ^a   O'Rourke, Donald M ^a   Davatzikos, Christos ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GADOBENATE DIMEGLUMINE; CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOBENIC ACID; MEGLUMINE; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND;

ARTICLE; BRAIN BLOOD VOLUME; CANCER INFILTRATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DYNAMIC SUSCEPTIBILITY CONTRAST MATERIAL ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMAN; LOADING DRUG DOSE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PERITUMORAL REGION; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE; SURVIVAL RATE; TUMOR RECURRENCE; ANALOGS AND DERIVATIVES; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; BRAIN TUMOR; DIAGNOSTIC USE; FEMALE; MALE; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

BRAIN NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MEGLUMINE; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84910087740     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132458     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Thompson G, Mills SJ, Coope DJ, O'Connor JP, Jackson A. Imaging biomarkers of angiogenesis and the microvascular environment in cerebral tumours. Br J Radiol 2011; 84(Spec No 2):S127-S144.
2. Yang I, Aghi MK. New advances that enable identification of glioblastoma recurrence. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2009;6(11):648-657.
3. Konukoglu E, Clatz O, Bondiau PY, Delingette H, Ayache N. Extrapolating glioma invasion margin in brain magnetic resonance images: suggesting new irradiation margins. Med Image Anal 2010;14(2):111-125.
4. Tykocinski ES, Grant RA, Kapoor GS, et al. Use of magnetic perfusion-weighted imaging to determine epidermal growth factor receptor variant III expression in glioblastoma. Neuro-oncol 2012;14(5):613- 623.
5. Aronen HJ, Gazit IE, Louis DN, et al. Cerebral blood volume maps of gliomas: comparison with tumor grade and histologic findings. Radiology 1994;191(1):41-51.
6. Rosen BR, Belliveau JW, Vevea JM, Brady TJ. Perfusion imaging with NMR contrast agents. Magn Reson Med 1990;14(2):249- 265.
7. Østergaard L. Principles of cerebral perfusion imaging by bolus tracking. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;22(6):710-717.
8. Wolf RL, Detre JA. Clinical neuroimaging using arterial spin-labeled perfusion magnetic resonance imaging. Neurotherapeutics 2007;4(3):346-359.
9. Covarrubias DJ, Rosen BR, Lev MH. Dynamic magnetic resonance perfusion imaging of brain tumors. Oncologist 2004;9(5): 528-537.
10. Barbier EL, Lamalle L, Décorps M. Methodology of brain perfusion imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13(4):496-520.
11. Chou YC, Teng MM, Guo WY, Hsieh JC, Wu YT. Classification of hemodynamics from dynamic-susceptibility-contrast magnetic resonance (DSC-MR) brain images using noiseless independent factor analysis. Med Image Anal 2007;11(3):242-253.
12. Hochberg FH, Pruitt A. Assumptions in the radiotherapy of glioblastoma. Neurology 1980; 30(9):907-911.
13. Barajas RF Jr, Chang JS, Segal MR, et al. Differentiation of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme from radiation necrosis after external beam radiation therapy with dynamic susceptibility- weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2009;253(2): 486-496.
14. Smith SM, Brady JM. SUSAN- A new approach to low level image processing. Int J Comput Vis 1997;23(1):45-78.
15. Sled JG, Zijdenbos AP, Evans AC. A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1998;17(1):87-97.
16. Jenkinson M, Smith S. A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal 2001;5(2):143-156.
17. Smith SM. Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 2002;17(3):143- 155.
18. Jenkinson M, Beckmann CF, Behrens TE, Woolrich MW, Smith SM. FSL. NeuroImage 2012;62(2):782-790.
19. Gooya A, Pohl KM, Bilello M, et al. GLISTR: glioma image segmentation and registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2012;31(10):1941- 1954.
20. Pearson K. LIII. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philos Mag Ser 6 1901;2(11):559-572.
21. Yamahara T, Numa Y, Oishi T, et al. Morphological and flow cytometric analysis of cell infiltration in glioblastoma: A comparison of autopsy brain and neuroimaging. Brain Tumor Pathol 2010;27(2):81-87.
22. Guo J, Yao C, Chen H, et al. The relationship between Cho/NAA and glioma metabolism: implementation for margin delineation of cerebral gliomas. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2012;154(8):1361-1370; discussion 1370.
23. Cortes C, Vapnik V. Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 1995;20(3):273-297.
24. Chang CC, Lin CJ. LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol 2011;2(3):27.
25. Drucker H, Burges CJ, Kaufman L, Smola A, Vapnik V. Support vector regression machines. In: Advances in neural information processing systems 9. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1997; 155-161.
26. Barajas RF Jr, Phillips JJ, Parvataneni R, et al. Regional variation in histopathologic features of tumor specimens from treatmentnaive glioblastoma correlates with anatomic and physiologic MR Imaging. Neuro-oncol 2012;14(7):942-954.
27. Chang EL, Akyurek S, Avalos T, et al. Evaluation of peritumoral edema in the delineation of radiotherapy clinical target volumes for glioblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;68(1):144-150.