Literature DB >> 19198847

Tumour enhancing fraction (EnF) in glioma: relationship to tumour grade.

Samantha J Mills1, Calvin Soh, James P B O'Connor, Chris J Rose, Giovanni A Buonaccorsi, Susan Cheung, Sha Zhao, Geoff J M Parker, Alan Jackson.   

Abstract

The aim of this research was to determine whether the proportion of a tumour that enhances (enhancing fraction, EnF) and changes in EnF with enhancement threshold differ between low and high grade glioma. Forty-four patients (45 gliomas comprising 16 grade II, 5 grade III and 24 grade IV) were studied. Imaging included pre- and post-contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted sequences and T(1)-weighted DCE-MRI. Thresholded enhancement maps were generated for each tumour by using a range of values of the initial area under the contrast concentration curve (IAUC). A plot of EnF versus threshold value was generated. We examined the relationship between tumour grade and enhancement metrics including: EnF (threshold IAUC > 0 mMol s), EnF (threshold IAUC > 2.5 mMol s), initial slope of the EnF/threshold curve (partial differentialEnF), IAUC, and two previously described signal-intensity-based metrics. EnF, defined as the proportion of tumour showing any enhancement (threshold IAUC > 0 mMol s), showed no difference between low and high grade glioma. All other measures demonstrated significant differences between grade II and IV, and low (grade II) and high grade (grades III/ IV) gliomas (p < 0.01). Two measures, partial differentialEnF and Pronin's measure of enhancement, showed differences between grade III and IV (p < 0.05). No measure separated grade II from III. Metrics which describe the enhancing fraction and its variation with enhancement threshold partial differentialEnF show considerably different behaviour in low and high grade tumours. These observations suggest that these metrics may provide important biological information concerning tumour biology and therapeutic responses and encourage further research to characterise and validate these novel biomarkers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19198847     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-1288-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  17 in total

1.  Prognostic significance of preoperative MRI scans in glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  M A Hammoud; R Sawaya; W Shi; P F Thall; N E Leeds
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 2.  Analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.

Authors:  A Jackson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Can tumor contrast enhancement be used as a criterion for differentiating tumor grades of oligodendrogliomas?

Authors:  Matthew L White; Yan Zhang; Patricia Kirby; Timothy C Ryken
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  MRI of high-grade glial tumors: correlation between the degree of contrast enhancement and the volume of surrounding edema.

Authors:  I N Pronin; A I Holodny; A V Petraikin
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 2.804

5.  Kinetics of vascular normalization by VEGFR2 blockade governs brain tumor response to radiation: role of oxygenation, angiopoietin-1, and matrix metalloproteinases.

Authors:  Frank Winkler; Sergey V Kozin; Ricky T Tong; Sung-Suk Chae; Michael F Booth; Igor Garkavtsev; Lei Xu; Daniel J Hicklin; Dai Fukumura; Emmanuelle di Tomaso; Lance L Munn; Rakesh K Jain
Journal:  Cancer Cell       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 31.743

6.  Blockade of platelet-derived growth factor receptor-beta by CDP860, a humanized, PEGylated di-Fab', leads to fluid accumulation and is associated with increased tumor vascularized volume.

Authors:  G C Jayson; G J M Parker; S Mullamitha; J W Valle; M Saunders; L Broughton; J Lawrance; B Carrington; C Roberts; B Issa; D L Buckley; S Cheung; K Davies; Y Watson; K Zinkewich-Péotti; L Rolfe; A Jackson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-10-04       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Differentiation of glioblastoma multiforme and single brain metastasis by peak height and percentage of signal intensity recovery derived from dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging.

Authors:  S Cha; J M Lupo; M-H Chen; K R Lamborn; M W McDermott; M S Berger; S J Nelson; W P Dillon
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2007 Jun-Jul       Impact factor: 3.825

8.  Enhancing fraction predicts clinical outcome following first-line chemotherapy in patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  James P B O'Connor; Gordon C Jayson; Alan Jackson; Dana Ghiorghiu; Bernadette M Carrington; Chris J Rose; Samantha J Mills; Ric Swindell; Caleb Roberts; Claire L Mitchell; Geoffrey J M Parker
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-10-15       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Phase I evaluation of a fully human anti-alphav integrin monoclonal antibody (CNTO 95) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Authors:  Saifee A Mullamitha; Nhuan C Ton; Geoff J M Parker; Alan Jackson; Peter J Julyan; Caleb Roberts; Gio A Buonaccorsi; Yvonne Watson; Karen Davies; Sue Cheung; Lynn Hope; Juan W Valle; John A Radford; Jeremy Lawrance; Mark P Saunders; Mihaela C Munteanu; Marian T Nakada; Jeffrey A Nemeth; Hugh M Davis; Qun Jiao; Uma Prabhakar; Zhihui Lang; Robert E Corringham; Robert A Beckman; Gordon C Jayson
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-04-01       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 10.  The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system.

Authors:  David N Louis; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Webster K Cavenee; Peter C Burger; Anne Jouvet; Bernd W Scheithauer; Paul Kleihues
Journal:  Acta Neuropathol       Date:  2007-07-06       Impact factor: 17.088

View more
  7 in total

1.  Grading of cerebral glioma with multiparametric MR imaging and 18F-FDG-PET: concordance and accuracy.

Authors:  Jeong Hee Yoon; Ji-hoon Kim; Won Jun Kang; Chul-Ho Sohn; Seung Hong Choi; Tae Jin Yun; Yong Eun; Yong Sub Song; Kee-Hyun Chang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Enhancing fraction in glioma and its relationship to the tumoral vascular microenvironment: A dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging study.

Authors:  S J Mills; C Soh; J P B O'Connor; C J Rose; G Buonaccorsi; S Cheung; S Zhao; G J M Parker; A Jackson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Low-grade (WHO II) and anaplastic (WHO III) gliomas: differences in morphology and MRI signal intensities.

Authors:  Max-Ludwig Schäfer; Martin H Maurer; Michael Synowitz; Joost Wüstefeld; Tim Marnitz; Florian Streitparth; Edzard Wiener
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-05-19       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Emerging methods for disease monitoring in malignant gliomas.

Authors:  Prakash Ambady; Chetan Bettegowda; Matthias Holdhoff
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2013-11

5.  Imaging vascular function for early stage clinical trials using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  M O Leach; B Morgan; P S Tofts; D L Buckley; W Huang; M A Horsfield; T L Chenevert; D J Collins; A Jackson; D Lomas; B Whitcher; L Clarke; R Plummer; I Judson; R Jones; R Alonzi; T Brunner; D M Koh; P Murphy; J C Waterton; G Parker; M J Graves; T W J Scheenen; T W Redpath; M Orton; G Karczmar; H Huisman; J Barentsz; A Padhani
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-05-07       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Assessment of blood-brain barrier disruption using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. A systematic review.

Authors:  Anna K Heye; Ross D Culling; Maria Del C Valdés Hernández; Michael J Thrippleton; Joanna M Wardlaw
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 4.881

7.  Mitotic Activity in Glioblastoma Correlates with Estimated Extravascular Extracellular Space Derived from Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging.

Authors:  S J Mills; D du Plessis; P Pal; G Thompson; G Buonacorrsi; C Soh; G J M Parker; A Jackson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 3.825

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.