Which combination of MR imaging modalities is best for predicting recurrent glioblastoma? Study of diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility

Radiology

Volumn 273, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 831-843

  Kim, Ho Sung ^a   Goh, Myeong Ju ^a   Kim, Namkug ^a   Choi, Choong Gon ^a   Kim, Sang Joon ^a   Kim, Jeong Hoon ^a  

^a University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GADOTERATE MEGLUMINE; TEMOZOLOMIDE;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; APPARENT DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BRAIN BLOOD VOLUME; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURGERY; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; CONTRAST ENHANCED T1 WEIGHTED IMAGING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; DYNAMIC SUSCEPTIBILITY CONTRAST ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; INTERREADER AGREEMENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PERFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION NECROSIS; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VALIDATION PROCESS; BRAIN TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ADULT; AGED; BRAIN NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84916604028     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132868     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Chamberlain MC, Glantz MJ, Chalmers L, Van Horn A, Sloan AE. Early necrosis following concurrent Temodar and radiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 2007;82(1):81-83
2. Gasparetto EL, Pawlak MA, Patel SH, et al. Posttreatment recurrence of malignant brain neoplasm: Accuracy of relative cere prebral blood volume fraction in discriminating low from high malignant histologic volume fraction. Radiology 2009;250(3):887-896
3. Chamberlain MC. Pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(26):4359-4360
4. Fatterpekar GM, Galheigo D, Narayana A, Johnson G, Knopp E. Treatment-related change versus tumor recurrence in highgrade gliomas: A diagnostic conundrum- use of dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced (DSC) perfusion MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198(1):19-26
5. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Tomiguchi S, et al. Posttherapeutic intraaxial brain tumor: The value of perfusion-sensitive contrastenhanced MR imaging for differentiating tumor recurrence from nonneoplastic contrast- enhancing tissue. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21(5):901-909
6. Hustinx R, Pourdehnad M, Kaschten B, Alavi A. PET imaging for differentiating recurrent brain tumor from radiation necrosis. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43(1):35-47
7. Ricci PE, Karis JP, Heiserman JE, Fram EK, Bice AN, Drayer BP. Differentiating recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis: Time for re-evaluation of positron emission tomography? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1998;19(3):407-413
8. Prat R, Galeano I, Lucas A, et al. Relative value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy, magnetic resonance perfusion, and 2-(18F) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography for detection of recurrence or grade increase in gliomas. J Clin Neurosci 2010;17(1):50-53
9. Roberts C, Issa B, Stone A, Jackson A, Waterton JC, Parker GJ. Comparative study into the robustness of compartmental modeling and model-free analysis in DCE-MRI studies. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;23(4):554-563
10. Cheng HL, Wallis C, Shou Z, Farhat WA. Quantifying angiogenesis in VEGF-enhanced tissue-engineered bladder constructs by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using contrast agents of different molecular weights. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25(1):137-145
11. Padhani AR. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical oncology: Current status and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16(4):407-422
12. Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, et al. Assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapeutics using MRI: Recommendations for appropriate methodology for clinical trials. Br J Radiol 2003;76(Spec No. 1):S87-S91
13. Hawighorst H, Weikel W, Knapstein PG, et al. Angiogenic activity of cervical carcinoma: Assessment by functional magnetic resonance imaging-based parameters and a histomorphological approach in correlation with disease outcome. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4(10):2305-2312
14. Mayr NA, Yuh WT, Zheng J, et al. Prediction of tumor control in patients with cervical cancer: Analysis of combined volume and dynamic enhancement pattern by MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170(1):177-182
15. Tihan T, Barletta J, Parney I, Lamborn K, Sneed PK, Chang S. Prognostic value of detecting recurrent glioblastoma multiforme in surgical specimens from patients after radiotherapy: Should pathology evaluation alter treatment decisions? Hum Pathol 2006;37(3):272-282
16. Rock JP, Scarpace L, Hearshen D, et al. Associations among magnetic resonance spectroscopy, apparent diffusion coefficients, and image-guided histopathology with special attention to radiation necrosis. Neurosurgery 2004;54(5):1111-1117; discussion 1117-1119
17. Evelhoch JL, LoRusso PM, He Z, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging measurements of the response of murine and human tumors to the vascular-targeting agent ZD6126. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10(11):3650-3657
18. Young RJ, Gupta A, Shah AD, et al. Potential utility of conventional MRI signs in diagnosing pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. Neurology 2011;76(22):1918-1924
19. Mullins ME, Barest GD, Schaefer PW, Hochberg FH, Gonzalez RG, Lev MH. Radiation necrosis versus glioma recurrence: Conventional MR imaging clues to diagnosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26(8):1967-1972
20. Tozer DJ, Jäger HR, Danchaivijitr N, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient histograms may predict low-grade glioma subtype. NMR Biomed 2007;20(1):49-57
21. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: A nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44(3):837-845
22. Hu X, Wong KK, Young GS, Guo L, Wong ST. Support vector machine multiparametric MRI identification of pseudoprogression from tumor recurrence in patients with resected glioblastoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33(2):296-305
23. Hilario A, Ramos A, Perez-Nuñez A, et al. The added value of apparent diffusion coefficient to cerebral blood volume in the prebral operative grading of diffuse gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33(4):701-707
24. Valles FE, Perez-Valles CL, Regalado S, Barajas RF, Rubenstein JL, Cha S. Combined diffusion and perfusion MR imaging as biomarkers of prognosis in immunocompetent patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34(1):35-40
25. Johnson G, Wetzel SG, Cha S, Babb J, Tofts PS. Measuring blood volume and vascular transfer constant from dynamic, T(2).∗- weighted contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2004;51(5):961-968
26. 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
27. Narang J, Jain R, Arbab AS, et al. Differentiating treatment-induced necrosis from recurrent/progressive brain tumor using nonmodel-based semiquantitative indices derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR perfusion. Neuro-oncol 2011;13(9):1037-1046
28. Tofts PS, Kermode AG. Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. I. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med 1991;17(2):357-367
29. Gossmann A, Helbich TH, Kuriyama N, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a surrogate marker of tumor response to anti-angiogenic therapy in a xenograft model of glioblastoma multiforme. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;15(3):233-240
30. Schmainda KM, Rand SD, Joseph AM, et al. Characterization of a first-pass gradientecho spin-echo method to predict brain tumor grade and angiogenesis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25(9):1524-1532
31. Hakyemez B, Erdogan C, Ercan I, Ergin N, Uysal S, Atahan S. High-grade and low-grade gliomas: Differentiation by using perfusion MR imaging. Clin Radiol 2005;60(4):493-502
32. Weber MA, Thilmann C, Lichy MP, et al. Assessment of irradiated brain metastases by means of arterial spin-labeling and dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI: Initial results. Invest Radiol 2004;39(5):277-287
33. Lee MC, Cha S, Chang SM, Nelson SJ. Dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging of radiation effects in normal-appearing brain tissue: Changes in the first-pass and recirculation phases. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21(6):683-693
34. Boxerman JL, Schmainda KM, Weisskoff RM. Relative cerebral blood volume maps corrected for contrast agent extravasation significantly correlate with glioma tumor grade, whereas uncorrected maps do not. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27(4):859-867
35. Donahue KM, Krouwer HG, Rand SD, et al. Utility of simultaneously acquired gradientecho and spin-echo cerebral blood volume and morphology maps in brain tumor patients. Magn Reson Med 2000;43(6):845-853
36. Bruening R, Kwong KK, Vevea MJ, et al. Echo-planar MR determination of relative cerebral blood volume in human brain tumors: T1 versus T2 weighting. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1996;17(5):831-840
37. Evelhoch JL. Key factors in the acquisition of contrast kinetic data for oncology. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10(3):254-259
38. Chung WJ, Kim HS, Kim N, Choi CG, Kim SJ. Recurrent glioblastoma: optimum area under the curve method derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2013;269(2):561-568
39. Hu LS, Baxter LC, Smith KA, et al. Relative cerebral blood volume values to differentiate high-grade glioma recurrence from posttreatment radiation effect: Direct correlation between image-guided tissue histopathology and localized dynamic susceptibilityweighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging measurements. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30(3):552-558
40. Levy LM. What is right about MRI permeability studies. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26(1):3-4.