Pitfalls in the neuroimaging of glioblastoma in the era of antiangiogenic and immuno/targeted therapy - detecting illusive disease, defining response

Frontiers in Neurology

Volumn 6, Issue FEB, 2015, Pages

  Huang, Raymond Y ^a   Neagu, Martha ^a   Reardon, David ^a   Wen, Patrick ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Antiangiogenic therapy; Glioblastoma; Imaging techniques; Immunotherapy; Pseudoprogression; Pseudoresponse

Indexed keywords

ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITOR; BEVACIZUMAB; CEDIRANIB; CORTICOSTEROID; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; IRINOTECAN; SIPULEUCEL T; TEMOZOLOMIDE;

CANCER GENE THERAPY; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FOLLOW UP; GLIOBLASTOMA; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PERFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REVIEW; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

EID: 84926471924     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16642295     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2015.00033     Document Type: Review

References (179)

1. Stupp R, Hegi ME, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Taphoorn MJB, Janzer RC, 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) 10:459-66. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70025-7
2. Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Liao P, Rouse C, Chen Y, Dowling J, et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2007-2011. Neuro Oncol (2014) 16(Suppl 4):iv1-63. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nou223
3. Brennan CW, Verhaak RGW, McKenna A, Campos B, Noushmehr H, Salama SR, et al. The somatic genomic landscape of glioblastoma. Cell (2013) 155:462-77. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.09.034
4. Wen PY, Kesari S. Malignant gliomas in adults. N Engl J Med (2008) 359:492-507. doi:10.1056/NEJMra0708126
5. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJB, et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med (2005) 352:987-96. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043330
6. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA, Cloughesy TF, Sorensen AG, Galanis E, et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28:1963-72. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3541
7. Taal W, Oosterkamp HM, Walenkamp AME, Dubbink HJ, Beerepoot LV, Hanse MCJ, et al. Single-agent bevacizumab or lomustine versus a combination of bevacizumab plus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (BELOB trial): a randomised controlled phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol (2014) 15:943-53. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70314-6
8. Hottinger AF, Stupp R, Homicsko K. Standards of care and novel approaches in the management of glioblastoma multiforme. Chin J Cancer (2014) 33:32-9. doi:10.5732/cjc.013.10207
9. Wen PY, Ellingson BM, Reardon DA, Fine HA, Abrey L, Ballman K, et al. Report of the jumpstarting brain tumor drug development 5 coalition and FDA clinical trials neuroimaging endpoint workshop (January 30, 2014, Bethesda MD). Neuro Oncol (2014) 16:vii36-47. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nou226
10. Lamborn KR, Yung WKA, Chang SM, Wen PY, Cloughesy TF, De Angelis LM, et al. Progression-free survival: an important end point in evaluating therapy for recurrent high-grade gliomas. Neuro Oncol (2008) 10:162-70. doi:10.1215/15228517-2007-062
11. Niendorf HP, Laniado M, Semmler W, Schörner W, Felix R. Dose administration of gadolinium-DTPA in MR imaging of intracranial tumors. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (1987) 8:803-15.
12. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC Jr, Cairncross JG. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol (1990) 8:1277-80.
13. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst (2000) 92:205-16. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205
14. Van den Bent MJ, Vogelbaum MA, Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Chang SM. End point assessment in gliomas: novel treatments limit usefulness of classical Macdonald's criteria. J Clin Oncol (2009) 27:2905-8. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.22.4998
15. Brandsma D, Stalpers L, Taal W, Sminia P, van den Bent MJ. Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. Lancet Oncol (2008) 9:453-61. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70125-6
16. Valtonen S, Timonen U, Toivanen P, Kalimo H, Kivipelto L, Heiskanen O, et al. Interstitial chemotherapy with carmustine-loaded polymers for high-grade gliomas: a randomized double-blind study. Neurosurgery (1997) 41:44-8. doi:10.1097/00006123-199707000-00011
17. Westphal M, Hilt DC, Bortey E, Delavault P, Olivares R, Warnke PC, et al. A phase 3 trial of local chemotherapy with biodegradable carmustine (BCNU) wafers (Gliadel wafers) in patients with primary malignant glioma. Neuro Oncol (2003) 5:79-88. doi:10.1215/S1522-8517-02-00023-6
18. Westphal M, Ram Z, Riddle V, Hilt D, Bortey E. Executive committee of the Gliadel Study Group. Gliadel wafer in initial surgery for malignant glioma: long-term follow-up of a multicenter controlled trial. Acta Neurochir (Wien) (2006) 148:269-75. doi:10.1007/s00701-005-0707-z
19. Brem H, Piantadosi S, Burger PC, Walker M, Selker R, Vick NA, et al. Placebo-controlled trial of safety and efficacy of intraoperative controlled delivery by biodegradable polymers of chemotherapy for recurrent gliomas. The Polymer-brain Tumor Treatment Group. Lancet (1995) 345:1008-12. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(95)90755-6
20. Subach BR, Witham TF, Kondziolka D, Lunsford LD, Bozik M, Schiff D. Morbidity and survival after 1,3-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea wafer implantation for recurrent glioblastoma: a retrospective case-matched cohort series. Neurosurgery (1999) 45:17-22. doi:10.1097/00006123-199907000-00004
21. Della Puppa A, Rossetto M, Ciccarino P, Del Moro G, Rotilio A, Manara R, et al. The first 3 months after BCNU wafers implantation in high-grade glioma patients: clinical and radiological considerations on a clinical series. Acta Neurochir (Wien) (2010) 152:1923-31. doi:10.1007/s00701-010-0759-6
22. Ulmer S, Spalek K, Nabavi A, Schultka S, Mehdorn HM, Kesari S, et al. Temporal changes in magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of Gliadel wafers and of the adjacent brain parenchyma. Neuro Oncol (2012) 14:482-90. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos003
23. Colen RR, Zinn PO, Hazany S, Do-Dai D, Wu JK, Yao K, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging appearance and changes on intracavitary Gliadel wafer placement: a pilot study. World J Radiol (2011) 3:266-72. doi:10.4329/wjr.v3.i11.266
24. Rosen BR, Belliveau JW, Vevea JM, Brady TJ. Perfusion imaging with NMR contrast agents. Magn Reson Med (1990) 14:249-65. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910140211
25. Villringer A, Rosen BR, Belliveau JW, Ackerman JL, Lauffer RB, Buxton RB, et al. Dynamic imaging with lanthanide chelates in normal brain: contrast due to magnetic susceptibility effects. Magn Reson Med (1988) 6:164-74. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910060205
26. Rosen BR, Belliveau JW, Buchbinder BR, McKinstry RC, Porkka LM, Kennedy DN, et al. Contrast agents and cerebral hemodynamics. Magn Reson Med (1991) 19:285-92. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910190216
27. Emblem KE, Bjornerud A. An automatic procedure for normalization of cerebral blood volume maps in dynamic susceptibility contrast-based glioma imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2009) 30:1929-32. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1680
28. Bedekar D, Jensen T, Schmainda KM. Standardization of relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) image maps for ease of both inter-and intrapatient comparisons. Magn Reson Med (2010) 64:907-13. doi:10.1002/mrm.22445
29. Jain R, Scarpace L, Ellika S, Schultz LR, Rock JP, Rosenblum ML, et al. First-pass perfusion computed tomography: initial experience in differentiating recurrent brain tumors from radiation effects and radiation necrosis. Neurosurgery (2007) 61:778-86. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000298906.48388.26
30. Barajas RF, Chang JS, Segal MR, Parsa AT, McDermott MW, Berger MS, 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) 253:486-96. doi:10.1148/radiol.2532090007
31. Hu LS, Baxter LC, Smith KA, Feuerstein BG, Karis JP, Eschbacher JM, 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 susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging measurements. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2009) 30:552-8. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1377
32. Matsusue E, Fink JR, Rockhill JK, Ogawa T, Maravilla KR. Distinction between glioma progression and post-radiation change by combined physiologic MR imaging. Neuroradiology (2010) 52:297-306. doi:10.1007/s00234-009-0613-9
33. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Tomiguchi S, Shigematsu Y, Ikushima I, Kira T, et al. Posttherapeutic intraaxial brain tumor: the value of perfusion-sensitive contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiating tumor recurrence from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2000) 21:901-9.
34. Baek HJ, Kim HS, Kim N, Choi YJ, Kim YJ. Percent change of perfusion skewness and kurtosis: a potential imaging biomarker for early treatment response in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastomas. Radiology (2012) 264:834-43. doi:10.1148/radiol.12112120
35. Hu LS, Eschbacher JM, Heiserman JE, Dueck AC, Shapiro WR, Liu S, et al. Reevaluating the imaging definition of tumor progression: perfusion MRI quantifies recurrent glioblastoma tumor fraction, pseudoprogression, and radiation necrosis to predict survival. Neuro Oncol (2012) 14:919-30. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos112
36. Tsien C, Galbán CJ, Chenevert TL, Johnson TD, Hamstra DA, Sundgren PC, et al. Parametric response map as an imaging biomarker to distinguish progression from pseudoprogression in high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28:2293-9. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.25.3971
37. Cao Y, Shen Z, Chenevert TL, Ewing JR. Estimate of vascular permeability and cerebral blood volume using Gd-DTPA contrast enhancement and dynamic T2*-weighted MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging (2006) 24:288-96. doi:10.1002/jmri.20634
38. Mangla R, Singh G, Ziegelitz D, Milano MT, Korones DN, Zhong J, et al. Changes in relative cerebral blood volume 1 month after radiation-temozolomide therapy can help predict overall survival in patients with glioblastoma. Radiology (2010) 256:575-84. doi:10.1148/radiol.10091440
39. Paulson ES, Schmainda KM. Comparison of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR methods: recommendations for measuring relative cerebral blood volume in brain tumors. Radiology (2008) 249:601-13. doi:10.1148/radiol.2492071659
40. Hu LS, Baxter LC, Pinnaduwage DS, Paine TL, Karis JP, Feuerstein BG, et al. Optimized preload leakage-correction methods to improve the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging in posttreatment gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2010) 31:40-8. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1787
41. Uematsu H, Maeda M. Double-echo perfusion-weighted MR imaging: basic concepts and application in brain tumors for the assessment of tumor blood volume and vascular permeability. Eur Radiol (2006) 16:180-6. doi:10.1007/s00330-005-2807-9
42. 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) 27:859-67.
43. Kassner A, Annesley DJ, Zhu XP, Li KL, Kamaly-Asl ID, Watson Y, et al. Abnormalities of the contrast re-circulation phase in cerebral tumors demonstrated using dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced imaging: a possible marker of vascular tortuosity. J Magn Reson Imaging (2000) 11:103-13. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(200002)11:2<103::AID-JMRI5>3.0.CO;2-Z
44. Bjornerud A, Sorensen AG, Mouridsen K, Emblem KE. T1-and T2*-dominant extravasation correction in DSC-MRI: part I -theoretical considerations and implications for assessment of tumor hemodynamic properties. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab (2011) 31:2041-53. doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2011.52
45. Emblem KE, Bjornerud A, Mouridsen K, Borra RJH, Batchelor TT, Jain RK, et al. (1)-and T(2)(*)-dominant extravasation correction in DSC-MRI: part II-predicting patient outcome after a single dose of cediranib in recurrent glioblastoma patients. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab (2011) 31:2054-64. doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2011.39
46. Gahramanov S, Muldoon LL, Varallyay CG, Li X, Kraemer DF, Fu R, et al. Pseudoprogression of glioblastoma after chemo-and radiation therapy: diagnosis by using dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with ferumoxytol versus gadoteridol and correlation with survival. Radiology (2013) 266:842-52. doi:10.1148/radiol.12111472
47. Tofts PS, Kermode AG. Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med (1991) 17:357-67. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910170208
48. Tofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging (1997) 7:91-101. doi:10.1002/jmri.1880070113
49. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, Evelhoch JL, Henderson E, Knopp MV, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging (1999) 10:223-32. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199909)10:3<223::AID-JMRI2>3.0.CO;2-S
50. Larsen VA, Simonsen HJ, Law I, Larsson HBW, Hansen AE. Evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MRI in the differentiation of tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis. Neuroradiology (2013) 55:361-9. doi:10.1007/s00234-012-1127-4
51. Bisdas S, Naegele T, Ritz R, Dimostheni A, Pfannenberg C, Reimold M, et al. Distinguishing recurrent high-grade gliomas from radiation injury: a pilot study using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Acad Radiol (2011) 18:575-83. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2011.01.018
52. Narang J, Jain R, Arbab AS, Mikkelsen T, Scarpace L, Rosenblum ML, 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) 13:1037-46. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nor075
53. Kim HS, Ju Goh M, Kim N, Choi CG, Kim SJ, Kim JH. Which combination of MR imaging modalities is best for predicting recurrent glioblastoma? Study of diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility. Radiology (2014) 273(3):831-43. doi:10.1148/radiol.14132868
54. Williams DS, Detre JA, Leigh JS, Koretsky AP. Magnetic resonance imaging of perfusion using spin inversion of arterial water. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1992) 89:212-6. doi:10.1073/pnas.89.1.212
55. Silva AC, Kim SG, Garwood M. Imaging blood flow in brain tumors using arterial spin labeling. Magn Reson Med (2000) 44:169-73. doi:10.1002/1522-2594(200008)44:2<169::AID-MRM1>3.0.CO;2-U
56. Furtner J, Schöpf V, Schewzow K, Kasprian G, Weber M, Woitek R, et al. Arterial spin-labeling assessment of normalized vascular intratumoral signal intensity as a predictor of histologic grade of astrocytic neoplasms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2014) 35(3):482-9. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3705
57. Warmuth C, Gunther M, Zimmer C. Quantification of blood flow in brain tumors: comparison of arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology (2003) 228:523-32. doi:10.1148/radiol.2282020409
58. Choi YJ, Kim HS, Jahng G-H, Kim SJ, Suh DC. Pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma: added value of arterial spin labeling to dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging. Acta Radiol (2013) 54:448-54. doi:10.1177/0284185112474916
59. Geer CP, Simonds J, Anvery A, Chen MY, Burdette JH, Zapadka ME, et al. Does MR perfusion imaging impact management decisions for patients with brain tumors? A prospective study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2012) 33(3):556-62. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2811
60. Yamasaki F, Kurisu K, Satoh K, Arita K, Sugiyama K, Ohtaki M, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient of human brain tumors at MR imaging1. Radiology (2005) 235:985-91. doi:10.1148/radiol.2353031338
61. Guo AC, Cummings TJ, Dash RC, Provenzale JM. Lymphomas and high-grade astrocytomas: comparison of water diffusibility and histologic characteristics1. Radiology (2002) 224:177-83. doi:10.1148/radiol.2241010637
62. Dorenbeck U, Grunwald IQ, Schlaier J, Feuerbach S. Diffusion-weighted imaging with calculated apparent diffusion coefficient of enhancing extra-axial masses. J Neuroimaging (2005) 15:341-7. doi:10.1177/1051228405279991
63. Rumboldt Z, Camacho DLA, Lake D, Welsh CT, Castillo M. Apparent diffusion coefficients for differentiation of cerebellar tumors in children. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2006) 27:1362-9.
64. Hayashida Y, Hirai T, Morishita S, Kitajima M, Murakami R, Korogi Y, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of metastatic brain tumors: comparison with histologic type and tumor cellularity. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2006) 27:1419-25.
65. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, Ikushima I, Shigematu Y, Hirai T, 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. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199901)9:1<53::AID-JMRI7>3.0.CO;2-2
66. Murakami R, Hirai T, Sugahara T, Fukuoka H, Toya R, Nishimura S, et al. Grading astrocytic tumors by using apparent diffusion coefficient parameters: superiority of a one-versus two-parameter pilot method1. Radiology (2009) 251:838-45. doi:10.1148/radiol.2513080899
67. Higano S, Yun X, Kumabe T, Watanabe M, Mugikura S, Umetsu A, et al. Malignant astrocytic tumors: clinical importance of apparent diffusion coefficient in prediction of grade and prognosis1. Radiology (2006) 241:839-46. doi:10.1148/radiol.2413051276
68. Kitis O, Altay H, Calli C, Yunten N, Akalin T, Yurtseven T. Minimum apparent diffusion coefficients in the evaluation of brain tumors. Eur J Radiol (2005) 55:393-400. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.02.004
69. Ellingson BM, Malkin MG, Rand SD, Connelly JM, Quinsey C, La Violette PS, et al. Validation of functional diffusion maps (fDMs) as a biomarker for human glioma cellularity. J Magn Reson Imaging (2010) 31:538-48. doi:10.1002/jmri.22068
70. Provenzale JM, McGraw P, Mhatre P, Guo AC, Delong D. Peritumoral brain regions in gliomas and meningiomas: investigation with isotropic diffusion-weighted MR imaging and diffusion-tensor MR imaging1. Radiology (2004) 232:451-60. doi:10.1148/radiol.2322030959
71. Smith JS, Cha S, Mayo MC, McDermott MW, Parsa AT, Chang SM, et al. Serial diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in cases of glioma: distinguishing tumor recurrence from postresection injury. J Neurosurg (2005) 103:428-38. doi:10.3171/jns.2005.103.3.0428
72. Hein PA, Eskey CJ, Dunn JF, Hug EB. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the follow-up of treated high-grade gliomas: tumor recurrence versus radiation injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2004) 25:201-9.
73. Asao C, Korogi Y, Kitajima M, Hirai T, Baba Y, Makino K, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of radiation-induced brain injury for differentiation from tumor recurrence. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2005) 26:1455-60.
74. Sundgren PC, Fan X, Weybright P, Welsh RC, Carlos RC, Petrou M, et al. Differentiation of recurrent brain tumor versus radiation injury using diffusion tensor imaging in patients with new contrast-enhancing lesions. Magn Reson Imaging (2006) 24:1131-42. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2006.07.008
75. Chenevert TL, Stegman LD, Taylor JM, Robertson PL, Greenberg HS, Rehemtulla A, et al. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: an early surrogate marker of therapeutic efficacy in brain tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst (2000) 92:2029-36. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.24.2029
76. Chenevert TL, McKeever PE, Ross BD. Monitoring early response of experimental brain tumors to therapy using diffusion magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Cancer Res (1997) 3:1457-66.
77. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Liau LM, Pope WB. Quantitative probabilistic functional diffusion mapping in newly diagnosed glioblastoma treated with radiochemotherapy. Neuro Oncol (2013) 15:382-90. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos314
78. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Zaw T, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Harris R, et al. Functional diffusion maps (fDMs) evaluated before and after radiochemotherapy predict progression-free and overall survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol (2012) 14:333-43. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nor220
79. Oz G, Alger JR, Barker PB, Bartha R, Bizzi A, Boesch C, et al. Clinical proton MR spectroscopy in central nervous system disorders. Radiology (2014) 270:658-79. doi:10.1148/radiol.13130531
80. Schlemmer HP, Bachert P, Herfarth KK, Zuna I, Debus J, van Kaick G. Proton MR spectroscopic evaluation of suspicious brain lesions after stereotactic radiotherapy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2001) 22:1316-24.
81. Dowling C, Bollen AW, Noworolski SM, McDermott MW, Barbaro NM, Day MR, et al. Preoperative proton MR spectroscopic imaging of brain tumors: correlation with histopathologic analysis of resection specimens. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2001) 22:604-12.
82. Rabinov JD, Lee PL, Barker FG, Louis DN, Harsh GR, Cosgrove GR, et al. In vivo 3-T MR spectroscopy in the distinction of recurrent glioma versus radiation effects: initial experience. Radiology (2002) 225:871-9. doi:10.1148/radiol.2253010997
83. Prat R, Galeano I, Lucas A, Martínez JC, Martín M, Amador R, 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) 17:50-3. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2009.02.035
84. McKnight TR, Von Dem Bussche MH, Vigneron DB, Lu Y, Berger MS, McDermott MW, et al. Histopathological validation of a three-dimensional magnetic resonance spectroscopy index as a predictor of tumor presence. J Neurosurg (2002) 97:794-802. doi:10.3171/jns.2002.97.4.0794
85. Yang I, Huh NG, Smith ZA, Han SJ, Parsa AT. Distinguishing glioma recurrence from treatment effect after radiochemotherapy and immunotherapy. Neurosurg Clin N Am (2010) 21:181-6. doi:10.1016/j.nec.2009.08.003
86. Rock JP, Scarpace L, Hearshen D, Gutierrez J, Fisher JL, Rosenblum M, et al. Associations among magnetic resonance spectroscopy, apparent diffusion coefficients, and image-guided histopathology with special attention to radiation necrosis. Neurosurgery (2004) 54:1111-7. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000119328.56431.A7
87. Weybright P, Sundgren PC, Maly P, Hassan DG, Nan B, Rohrer S, et al. Differentiation between brain tumor recurrence and radiation injury using MR spectroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol (2005) 185:1471-6. doi:10.2214/AJR.04.0933
88. Zeng Q-S, Li C-F, Zhang K, Liu H, Kang X-S, Zhen J-H. Multivoxel 3D proton MR spectroscopy in the distinction of recurrent glioma from radiation injury. J Neurooncol (2007) 84:63-9. doi:10.1007/s11060-007-9341-3
89. Smith EA, Carlos RC, Junck LR, Tsien CI, Elias A, Sundgren PC. Developing a clinical decision model: MR spectroscopy to differentiate between recurrent tumor and radiation change in patients with new contrast-enhancing lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol (2009) 192:W45-52. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.3934
90. Zhang H, Ma L, Wang Q, Zheng X, Wu C, Xu B-N. Role of magnetic resonance spectroscopy for the differentiation of recurrent glioma from radiation necrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol (2014) 83:2181-9. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.09.018
91. Estève F, Rubin C, Grand S, Kolodié H, Le Bas JF. Transient metabolic changes observed with proton MR spectroscopy in normal human brain after radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (1998) 40:279-86. doi:10.1016/S0360-3016(97)00714-1
92. Kaminaga T, Shirai K. Radiation-induced brain metabolic changes in the acute and early delayed phase detected with quantitative proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. J Comput Assist Tomogr (2005) 29:293-7. doi:10.1097/01.rct.0000161422.95625.8a
93. Di Chiro G, De La Paz RL, Brooks RA, Sokoloff L, Kornblith PL, Smith BH, et al. Glucose utilization of cerebral gliomas measured by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography. Neurology (1982) 32:1323-9. doi:10.1212/WNL.32.12.1323
94. Kincaid PK, El-Saden SM, Park SH, Goy BW. Cerebral gangliogliomas: preoperative grading using FDG-PET and 201Tl-SPECT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (1998) 19:801-6.
95. Delbeke D, Meyerowitz C, Lapidus RL, Maciunas RJ, Jennings MT, Moots PL, et al. Optimal cutoff levels of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the differentiation of low-grade from high-grade brain tumors with PET. Radiology (1995) 195:47-52. doi:10.1148/radiology.195.1.7892494
96. Di Chiro G. Positron emission tomography using [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose in brain tumors. A powerful diagnostic and prognostic tool. Invest Radiol (1987) 22:360-71. doi:10.1097/00004424-198705000-00002
97. Hustinx R, Smith RJ, Benard F, Bhatnagar A, Alavi A. Can the standardized uptake value characterize primary brain tumors on FDG-PET? Eur J Nucl Med (1999) 26:1501-9. doi:10.1007/s002590050487
98. Kosaka N, Tsuchida T, Uematsu H, Kimura H, Okazawa H, Itoh H. 18F-FDG PET of common enhancing malignant brain tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol (2008) 190:W365-9. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2660
99. De Witte O, Lefranc F, Levivier M, Salmon I, Brotchi J, Goldman S. FDG-PET as a prognostic factor in high-grade astrocytoma. J Neurooncol (2000) 49:157-63. doi:10.1023/A:1026518002800
100. Pardo FS, Aronen HJ, Fitzek M, Kennedy DN, Efird J, Rosen BR, et al. Correlation of FDG-PET interpretation with survival in a cohort of glioma patients. Anticancer Res (2004) 24:2359-65.
101. Tralins KS, Douglas JG, Stelzer KJ, Mankoff DA, Silbergeld DL, Rostomily RC, et al. Volumetric analysis of 18F-FDG PET in glioblastoma multiforme: prognostic information and possible role in definition of target volumes in radiation dose escalation. J Nucl Med (2002) 43:1667-73.
102. Spence AM, Muzi M, Graham MM, O'Sullivan F, Link JM, Lewellen TK, et al. 2-[(18)F]Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose and glucose uptake in malignant gliomas before and after radiotherapy: correlation with outcome. Clin Cancer Res (2002) 8:971-9.
103. Kelloff GJ, Hoffman JM, Johnson B, Scher HI, Siegel BA, Cheng EY, et al. Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res (2005) 11:2785-808. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-2626
104. Kim YH, Oh SW, Lim YJ, Park C-K, Lee S-H, Kang KW, et al. Differentiating radiation necrosis from tumor recurrence in high-grade gliomas: assessing the efficacy of 18F-FDG PET, 11C-methionine PET and perfusion MRI. Clin Neurol Neurosurg (2010) 112:758-65. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2010.06.005
105. Gómez-Río M, Rodríguez-Fernández A, Ramos-Font C, López-Ramírez E, Llamas-Elvira JM. Diagnostic accuracy of 201Thallium-SPECT and 18F-FDG-PET in the clinical assessment of glioma recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (2008) 35:966-75. doi:10.1007/s00259-007-0661-5
106. 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) 19:407-13.
107. Di Chiro G, Oldfield E, Wright DC, De Michele D, Katz DA, Patronas NJ, et al. Cerebral necrosis after radiotherapy and/or intraarterial chemotherapy for brain tumors: PET and neuropathologic studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol (1988) 150:189-97. doi:10.2214/ajr.150.1.189
108. Valk PE, Budinger TF, Levin VA, Silver P, Gutin PH, Doyle WK. PET of malignant cerebral tumors after interstitial brachytherapy. Demonstration of metabolic activity and correlation with clinical outcome. J Neurosurg (1988) 69:830-8. doi:10.3171/jns.1988.69.6.0830
109. Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, O'Sullivan SF, Link JM, Lewellen TK, et al. 18F-FDG PET of gliomas at delayed intervals: improved distinction between tumor and normal gray matter. J Nucl Med (2004) 45:1653-9.
110. Horky LL, Hsiao EM, Weiss SE, Drappatz J, Gerbaudo VH. Dual phase FDG-PET imaging of brain metastases provides superior assessment of recurrence versus post-treatment necrosis. J Neurooncol (2011) 103:137-46. doi:10.1007/s11060-010-0365-8
111. Padma MV, Said S, Jacobs M, Hwang DR, Dunigan K, Satter M, et al. Prediction of pathology and survival by FDG PET in gliomas. J Neurooncol (2003) 64:227-37. doi:10.1023/A:1025665820001
112. Kubota R, Yamada S, Kubota K, Ishiwata K, Tamahashi N, Ido T. Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. J Nucl Med (1992) 33:1972-80.
113. Isselbacher KJ. Sugar and amino acid transport by cells in culture -differences between normal and malignant cells. N Engl J Med (1972) 286:929-33. doi:10.1056/NEJM197204272861707
114. Busch H, Davis JR, Honig GR, Anderson DC, Nair PV, Nyhan WL. The uptake of a variety of amino acids into nuclear proteins of tumors and other tissues. Cancer Res (1959) 19:1030-9.
115. Kato T, Shinoda J, Oka N, Miwa K, Nakayama N, Yano H, et al. Analysis of 11C-methionine uptake in low-grade gliomas and correlation with proliferative activity. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2008) 29:1867-71. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1242
116. Sato N, Suzuki M, Kuwata N, Kuroda K, Wada T, Beppu T, et al. Evaluation of the malignancy of glioma using 11C-methionine positron emission tomography and proliferating cell nuclear antigen staining. Neurosurg Rev (1999) 22:210-4. doi:10.1007/s101430050018
117. Bergström M, Collins VP, Ehrin E, Ericson K, Eriksson L, Greitz T, et al. Discrepancies in brain tumor extent as shown by computed tomography and positron emission tomography using [68Ga]EDTA, [11C]glucose, and [11C]methionine. J Comput Assist Tomogr (1983) 7:1062-6. doi:10.1097/00004728-198312000-00022
118. Ericson K, Lilja A, Bergström M, Collins VP, Eriksson L, Ehrin E, et al. Positron emission tomography with ([11C]methyl)-l-methionine, [11C] d-glucose, and [68Ga]EDTA in supratentorial tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr (1985) 9:683-9. doi:10.1097/00004728-198507010-00005
119. Lilja A, Bergström K, Hartvig P, Spännare B, Halldin C, Lundqvist H, et al. Dynamic study of supratentorial gliomas with l-methyl-11C-methionine and positron emission tomography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (1985) 6:505-14.
120. De Witte O, Goldberg I, Wikler D, Rorive S, Damhaut P, Monclus M, et al. Positron emission tomography with injection of methionine as a prognostic factor in glioma. J Neurosurg (2001) 95:746-50. doi:10.3171/jns.2001.95.5.0746
121. Li D-L, Xu Y-K, Wang Q-S, Wu H-B, Li H-S. 11C-methionine and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT in the evaluation of patients with suspected primary and residual/recurrent gliomas. Chin Med J (Engl) (2012) 125:91-6.
122. Van Laere K, Ceyssens S, Van Calenbergh F, de Groot T, Menten J, Flamen P, et al. Direct comparison of 18F-FDG and 11C-methionine PET in suspected recurrence of glioma: sensitivity, inter-observer variability and prognostic value. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (2005) 32:39-51. doi:10.1007/s00259-004-1564-3
123. Chung J-K, Kim YK, Kim S, Lee YJ, Paek S, Yeo JS, et al. Usefulness of 11C-methionine PET in the evaluation of brain lesions that are hypo-or isometabolic on 18F-FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (2002) 29:176-82. doi:10.1007/s00259-001-0690-4
124. Go KG, Keuter EJ, Kamman RL, Pruim J, Metzemaekers JD, Staal MJ, et al. Contribution of magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging and l-[1-11C]tyrosine positron emission tomography to localization of cerebral gliomas for biopsy. Neurosurgery (1994) 34:994-1002. doi:10.1227/00006123-199406000-00007
125. Willemsen AT, van Waarde A, Paans AM, Pruim J, Luurtsema G, Go KG, et al. In vivo protein synthesis rate determination in primary or recurrent brain tumors using l-[1-11C]-tyrosine and PET. J Nucl Med (1995) 36:411-9.
126. Heesters MA, Go KG, Kamman RL, Mooyaart EL, Meertens H, Paans AM, et al. 11C-tyrosine position emission tomography and 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the response of brain gliomas to radiotherapy. Neuroradiology (1998) 40:103-8. doi:10.1007/s002340050548
127. Ullrich R, Backes H, Li H, Kracht L, Miletic H, Kesper K, et al. Glioma proliferation as assessed by 3'-fluoro-3'-deoxy-l-thymidine positron emission tomography in patients with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma. Clin Cancer Res (2008) 14:2049-55. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-1553
128. Schiepers C, Dahlbom M, Chen W, Cloughesy T, Czernin J, Phelps ME, et al. Kinetics of 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine during treatment monitoring of recurrent high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med (2010) 51:720-7. doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.068361
129. Muzi M, Spence AM, O'Sullivan F, Mankoff DA, Wells JM, Grierson JR, et al. Kinetic analysis of 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine in patients with gliomas. J Nucl Med (2006) 47:1612-21.
130. Spence AM, Muzi M, Link JM, O'Sullivan F, Eary JF, Hoffman JM, et al. NCI-sponsored trial for the evaluation of safety and preliminary efficacy of 3'-deoxy-3'-[18F]fluorothymidine (FLT) as a marker of proliferation in patients with recurrent gliomas: preliminary efficacy studies. Mol Imaging Biol (2009) 11:343-55. doi:10.1007/s11307-009-0215-2
131. Pöpperl G, Götz C, Rachinger W, Gildehaus F-J, Tonn J-C, Tatsch K. Value of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET for the diagnosis of recurrent glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (2004) 31:1464-70. doi:10.1007/s00259-004-1590-1
132. Pauleit D, Floeth F, Hamacher K, Riemenschneider MJ, Reifenberger G, Müller H-W, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET combined with MRI improves the diagnostic assessment of cerebral gliomas. Brain (2005) 128:678-87. doi:10.1093/brain/awh399
133. Rachinger W, Goetz C, Pöpperl G, Gildehaus FJ, Kreth FW, Holtmannspötter M, et al. Positron emission tomography with O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine versus magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of recurrent gliomas. Neurosurgery (2005) 57:505-11. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000171642.49553.B0
134. Dunet V, Rossier C, Buck A, Stupp R, Prior JO. Performance of 18F-fluoro-ethyl-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET for the differential diagnosis of primary brain tumor: a systematic review and Metaanalysis. J Nucl Med (2012) 53:207-14. doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.096859
135. Weber WA, Wester HJ, Grosu AL, Herz M, Dzewas B, Feldmann HJ, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine and l-[methyl-11C]methionine uptake in brain tumours: initial results of a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med (2000) 27:542-9. doi:10.1007/s002590050541
136. Heiss WD, Wienhard K, Wagner R, Lanfermann H, Thiel A, Herholz K, et al. F-Dopa as an amino acid tracer to detect brain tumors. J Nucl Med (1996) 37:1180-2.
137. Becherer A, Karanikas G, Szabó M, Zettinig G, Asenbaum S, Marosi C, et al. Brain tumour imaging with PET: a comparison between [18F]fluorodopa and [11C]methionine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (2003) 30:1561-7. doi:10.1007/s00259-003-1259-1
138. Schiepers C, Chen W, Cloughesy T, Dahlbom M, Huang S-C. 18F-FDOPA kinetics in brain tumors. J Nucl Med (2007) 48:1651-61. doi:10.2967/jnumed.106.039321
139. Fueger BJ, Czernin J, Cloughesy T, Silverman DH, Geist CL, Walter MA, et al. Correlation of 6-18F-fluoro-l-dopa PET uptake with proliferation and tumor grade in newly diagnosed and recurrent gliomas. J Nucl Med (2010) 51:1532-8. doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.078592
140. Ledezma CJ, Chen W, Sai V, Freitas B, Cloughesy T, Czernin J, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET/MRI fusion in patients with primary/recurrent gliomas: initial experience. Eur J Radiol (2009) 71:242-8. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.04.018
141. Chen W, Silverman DHS, Delaloye S, Czernin J, Kamdar N, Pope W, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with 18F-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. J Nucl Med (2006) 47:904-11.
142. Oborski MJ, Demirci E, Laymon CM, Lieberman FS, Mountz JM. Assessment of early therapy response with 18F-FLT PET in glioblastoma multiforme. Clin Nucl Med (2014) 39:e431-2. doi:10.1097/RLU.0000000000000321
143. Galldiks N, Langen K-J, Holy R, Pinkawa M, Stoffels G, Nolte KW, et al. Assessment of treatment response in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET in comparison to MRI. J Nucl Med (2012) 53:1048-57. doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.098590
144. Piroth MD, Pinkawa M, Holy R, Klotz J, Nussen S, Stoffels G, et al. Prognostic value of early [18F]fluoroethyltyrosine positron emission tomography after radiochemotherapy in glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (2011) 80:176-84. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.01.055
145. Batchelor TT, Duda DG, di Tomaso E, Ancukiewicz M, Plotkin SR, Gerstner E, et al. Phase II study of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28:2817-23. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3988
146. Batchelor TT, Sorensen AG, di Tomaso E, Zhang W-T, Duda DG, Cohen KS, et al. AZD2171, a pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, normalizes tumor vasculature and alleviates edema in glioblastoma patients. Cancer Cell (2007) 11:83-95. doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2006.11.021
147. Norden AD, Drappatz J, Muzikansky A, David K, Gerard M, McNamara MB, et al. An exploratory survival analysis of anti-angiogenic therapy for recurrent malignant glioma. J Neurooncol (2009) 92:149-55. doi:10.1007/s11060-008-9745-8
148. Melhem ER, Mehta NR. Dynamic T1-weighted spin-echo MR imaging: the role of digital subtraction in the demonstration of enhancing brain lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging (1999) 9:503-8. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199904)9:4<503::AID-JMRI1>3.0.CO;2-0
149. Kanaly CW, Ding D, Mehta AI, Waller AF, Crocker I, Desjardins A, et al. A novel method for volumetric MRI response assessment of enhancing brain tumors. PLoS One (2011) 6:e16031. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016031
150. Ellingson BM, Kim HJ, Woodworth DC, Pope WB, Cloughesy JN, Harris RJ, et al. Recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab: contrast-enhanced T1-weighted subtraction maps improve tumor delineation and aid prediction of survival in a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology (2014) 271:200-10. doi:10.1148/radiol.13131305
151. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Lalezari S, Zaw T, et al. Quantification of edema reduction using differential quantitative T2 (DQT2) relaxometry mapping in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. J Neurooncol (2012) 106(1):111-9. doi:10.1007/s11060-011-0638-x
152. Hattingen E, Jurcoane A, Daneshvar K, Pilatus U, Mittelbronn M, Steinbach JP, et al. Quantitative T2 mapping of recurrent glioblastoma under bevacizumab improves monitoring for non-enhancing tumor progression and predicts overall survival. Neuro Oncol (2013) 15:1395-404. doi:10.1093/neuonc/not105
153. Jalali S, Chung C, Foltz W, Burrell K, Singh S, Hill R, et al. MRI biomarkers identify the differential response of glioblastoma multiforme to anti-angiogenic therapy. Neuro Oncol (2014) 16:868-79. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nou040
154. Pope WB, Kim HJ, Huo J, Alger J, Brown MS, Gjertson D, et al. Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: ADC histogram analysis predicts response to bevacizumab treatment. Radiology (2009) 252:182-9. doi:10.1148/radiol.2521081534
155. Pope WB, Qiao XJ, Kim HJ, Lai A, Nghiemphu P, Xue X, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient histogram analysis stratifies progression-free and overall survival in patients with recurrent GBM treated with bevacizumab: a multi-center study. J Neurooncol (2012) 108:491-8. doi:10.1007/s11060-012-0847-y
156. Rahman R, Hamdan A, Zweifler R, Jiang H, Norden AD, Reardon DA, et al. Histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient within enhancing and nonenhancing tumor volumes in recurrent glioblastoma patients treated with bevacizumab. J Neurooncol (2014) 119:149-58. doi:10.1007/s11060-014-1464-8
157. Nowosielski M, Recheis W, Goebel G, Güler O, Tinkhauser G, Kostron H, et al. ADC histograms predict response to anti-angiogenic therapy in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. Neuroradiology (2011) 53:291-302. doi:10.1007/s00234-010-0808-0
158. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Mischel PS, Nghiemphu PL, Lalezari S, et al. Graded functional diffusion map-defined characteristics of apparent diffusion coefficients predict overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. Neuro Oncol (2011) 13:1151-61. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nor079
159. Ellingson BM, La Violette PS, Rand SD, Malkin MG, Connelly JM, Mueller WM, et al. Spatially quantifying microscopic tumor invasion and proliferation using a voxel-wise solution to a glioma growth model and serial diffusion MRI. Magn Reson Med (2011) 65:1131-43. doi:10.1002/mrm.22688
160. Gerstner ER, Chen P-J, Wen PY, Jain RK, Batchelor TT, Sorensen G. Infiltrative patterns of glioblastoma spread detected via diffusion MRI after treatment with cediranib. Neuro Oncol (2010) 12:466-72. doi:10.1093/neuonc/nop051
161. Jain R, Scarpace LM, Ellika S, Torcuator R, Schultz LR, Hearshen D, et al. Imaging response criteria for recurrent gliomas treated with bevacizumab: role of diffusion weighted imaging as an imaging biomarker. J Neurooncol (2010) 96:423-31. doi:10.1007/s11060-009-9981-6
162. Seo HS, Chang KH, Na DG, Kwon BJ, Lee DH. High b-value diffusion (b = 3000 s/mm2) MR imaging in cerebral gliomas at 3T: visual and quantitative comparisons with b = 1000 s/mm2. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2008) 29:458-63. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0842
163. Kang Y, Choi SH, Kim Y-J, Kim KG, Sohn C-H, Kim J-H, et al. Gliomas: histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient maps with standard-or high-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging -correlation with tumor grade. Radiology (2011) 261:882-90. doi:10.1148/radiol.11110686
164. Yamasaki F, Kurisu K, Aoki T, Yamanaka M, Kajiwara Y, Watanabe Y, et al. Advantages of high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging to diagnose pseudo-responses in patients with recurrent glioma after bevacizumab treatment. Eur J Radiol (2012) 81(10):2805-10. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.10.018
165. Sorensen AG, Batchelor TT, Zhang W-T, Chen P-J, Yeo P, Wang M, et al. A "vascular normalization index" as potential mechanistic biomarker to predict survival after a single dose of cediranib in recurrent glioblastoma patients. Cancer Res (2009) 69:5296-300. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-0814
166. Batchelor TT, Gerstner ER, Emblem KE, Duda DG, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Snuderl M, et al. Improved tumor oxygenation and survival in glioblastoma patients who show increased blood perfusion after cediranib and chemoradiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:19059-64. doi:10.1073/pnas.1318022110
167. Jain RK. Normalization of tumor vasculature: an emerging concept in antiangiogenic therapy. Science (2005) 307:58-62. doi:10.1126/science.1104819
168. Essock-Burns E, Lupo JM, Cha S, Polley M-Y, Butowski NA, Chang SM, et al. Assessment of perfusion MRI-derived parameters in evaluating and predicting response to antiangiogenic therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol (2011) 13:119-31. doi:10.1093/neuonc/noq143
169. Jain R, Gutierrez J, Narang J, Scarpace L, Schultz LR, Lemke N, et al. In vivo correlation of tumor blood volume and permeability with histologic and molecular angiogenic markers in gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2011) 32:388-94. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2280
170. Schmainda KM, Prah M, Connelly J, Rand SD, Hoffman RG, Mueller W, et al. Dynamic-susceptibility contrast agent MRI measures of relative cerebral blood volume predict response to bevacizumab in recurrent high-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol (2014) 16:880-8. doi:10.1093/neuonc/not216
171. Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW, Sosman JA, Haanen JB, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med (2010) 363:711-23. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1003466
172. Kantoff PW, Higano CS, Shore ND, Berger ER, Small EJ, Penson DF, et al. Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med (2010) 363:411-22. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1001294
173. Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O'Day S, Weber JS, Hamid O, Lebbé C, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin Cancer Res (2009) 15:7412-20. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1624
174. Camacho LH, Antonia S, Sosman J, Kirkwood JM, Gajewski TF, Redman B, et al. Phase I/II trial of tremelimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol (2009) 27:1075-81. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.19.2435
175. Weber JS, O'Day S, Urba W, Powderly J, Nichol G, Yellin M, et al. Phase I/II study of ipilimumab for patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol (2008) 26:5950-6. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.16.1927
176. Okada H, Pollack IF. Do we need novel radiologic response criteria for brain tumor immunotherapy? Expert Rev Neurother (2011) 11:619-22. doi:10.1586/ern.11.49
177. Floeth FW, Wittsack HJ, Engelbrecht V, Weber F. Comparative follow-up of enhancement phenomena with MRI and proton MR spectroscopic imaging after intralesional immunotherapy in glioblastoma -report of two exceptional cases. Zentralbl Neurochir (2002) 63:23-8. doi:10.1055/s-2002-31579
178. Pollack IF, Jakacki RI, Butterfield LH, Hamilton RL, Panigrahy A, Potter DM, et al. Antigen-specific immune responses and clinical outcome after vaccination with glioma-associated antigen peptides and polyinosinic-polycytidylic acid stabilized by lysine and carboxymethylcellulose in children with newly diagnosed malignant brainstem and nonbrainstem gliomas. J Clin Oncol (2014) 32:2050-8. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.54.0526
179. Vrabec M, Van Cauter S, Himmelreich U, Van Gool SW, Sunaert S, De Vleeschouwer S, et al. MR perfusion and diffusion imaging in the follow-up of recurrent glioblastoma treated with dendritic cell immunotherapy: a pilot study. Neuroradiology (2011) 53:721-31. doi:10.1007/s00234-010-0802-6