Literature DB >> 20602289

Differentiation between brain tumor recurrence and radiation injury using perfusion, diffusion-weighted imaging and MR spectroscopy.

Barbara Bobek-Billewicz1, Gabriela Stasik-Pres, Henryk Majchrzak, Lukasz Zarudzki.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Differentiation between tumor recurrence/vital tumor tissue and radionecrosis based on conventional diagnostic imaging is impossible because of the likeness of the images. In such circumstances advanced MRI techniques (PWI, DWI, 1HMRS) seem to be helpful. The aim of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of PWI, DWI and 1HMRS in the differentiation of the tumor recurrence from radiation related injury.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective analysis comprised 11 contrast-enhancing lesions observed in 8 patients treated for gliomas with radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy. 5 out of 11 contrast-enhancing lesions were tumor recurrences whereas 6 out of 11 radiation-related injuries. The MR examinations comprised of conventional MR imaging (T1-SE, T1-MPRAGE with CE, T2-TSE, T2 FLAIR) and PWI, DWI, 1HMRS. Mean and maximum rCBV values of each contrast-enhancing lesion were calculated. These values were normalized to normal appearing white matter. Mean normalized ADC ratio to normal appearing white matter and mean ADC obtained from contrast-enhancing lesions were analysed. In 1HMRS only those voxels which were placed in solid part of the contrast-enhancing lesion were analysed and Cho/Cr, Cho/NAA ratios presented.
RESULTS: Mean normalized rCBVmax (2.44 +/- 0.73 for tumor recurrence vs. 0.78 +/- 0.46 for radiation injury; p < 0.001) and mean normalized rCBVmean (1.46 +/- 0.49 for tumor recurrence vs. 0.49 +/- 0.38 for radiation injury; p < 0.005) were significantly higher in the recurrent gliomas group than in the radiation injury one. It was observed that normalized rCBVmax higher than 1.7 and normalized rCBVmean higher than 1.25 is highly indicative for recurrent glioma whereas normalized rCBVmax lower than 1.0 and normalized rCBVmean lower than 0.5 is highly indicative for radiation injury. Results obtained in DWI and 1HMRS were not statistically significant different between two analysed groups. Mean ADCce: 1.06 +/- 0.18 x 10-3 mm2/s for tumor recurrence vs. 1.13 +/- 0.13 x 10-3 mm2/s for radiation injury; p = 0.51. Mean normalized ADC: 1.55 +/- 0.39 x 10-3 mm2/s for tumor recurrence vs. 1.55 +/- 0.18 x 10-3 mm2/s for radiation injury; p = 0.98. Median Cho/Cr ratio: (2.16min/max [1.67-3.15] for tumor recurrence vs. 1.34min/max [1.13-2.37] for radiation injury; p = 0.15), median Cho/NAA ratio (1.9min/max [0.86-2.36] for tumor recurrence vs. 2.11min/max [0.97 vs. 2.87] for radiation injury; p = 0.51).
CONCLUSIONS: Among the analyzed advanced neuroimaging methods PWI seems to be most reliable in differentiation between tumor regrowth/recurrence and radiation necrosis. In these results mean rCBV is a better differing factor than max rCBV. Proton MR spectroscopy (1HMRS) and DWI do not differentiate analyzed groups with statistical significance, despite tendency to lower ADC values in recurrence group than in radiation injury one.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20602289

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Folia Neuropathol        ISSN: 1509-572X            Impact factor:   2.038


  31 in total

1.  ASFNR recommendations for clinical performance of MR dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging of the brain.

Authors:  K Welker; J Boxerman; A Kalnin; T Kaufmann; M Shiroishi; M Wintermark
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Radiation injury versus malignancy after stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases: impact of time-dependent changes in lesion morphology on MRI.

Authors:  Sabine Wagner; Heinrich Lanfermann; Gerrit Eichner; Hubert Gufler
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 12.300

Review 3.  The Role of Standard and Advanced Imaging for the Management of Brain Malignancies From a Radiation Oncology Standpoint.

Authors:  Robert H Press; Jim Zhong; Saumya S Gurbani; Brent D Weinberg; Bree R Eaton; Hyunsuk Shim; Hui-Kuo G Shu
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 4.654

4.  Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme versus radiation injury: a multiparametric 3-T MR approach.

Authors:  Alfonso Di Costanzo; Tommaso Scarabino; Francesca Trojsi; Teresa Popolizio; Simona Bonavita; Mario de Cristofaro; Renata Conforti; Adriana Cristofano; Claudio Colonnese; Ugo Salvolini; Gioacchino Tedeschi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Differentiation between treatment-related changes and progressive disease in patients with high grade brain tumors using support vector machine classification based on DCE MRI.

Authors:  Moran Artzi; Gilad Liberman; Guy Nadav; Deborah T Blumenthal; Felix Bokstein; Orna Aizenstein; Dafna Ben Bashat
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 4.130

6.  Centrally Reduced Diffusion Sign for Differentiation between Treatment-Related Lesions and Glioma Progression: A Validation Study.

Authors:  P Alcaide-Leon; J Cluceru; J M Lupo; T J Yu; T L Luks; T Tihan; N A Bush; J E Villanueva-Meyer
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Treatment-induced lesions in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy and heat-shock protein vaccine therapy.

Authors:  Paula Alcaide-Leon; Tracy L Luks; Marisa Lafontaine; Janine M Lupo; Hideho Okada; Jennifer L Clarke; Javier E Villanueva-Meyer
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  Diffusion and perfusion MRI to differentiate treatment-related changes including pseudoprogression from recurrent tumors in high-grade gliomas with histopathologic evidence.

Authors:  A J Prager; N Martinez; K Beal; A Omuro; Z Zhang; R J Young
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-01-15       Impact factor: 3.825

9.  Results of a questionnaire regarding practice patterns for the diagnosis and treatment of intracranial radiation necrosis after SRS.

Authors:  Abigail L Stockham; Manmeet Ahluwalia; Chandana A Reddy; John H Suh; Aryavarta Kumar; Michael A Vogelbaum; Gene H Barnett; Erin S Murphy; Samuel T Chao
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 10.  Discriminating radiation necrosis from tumor progression in gliomas: a systematic review what is the best imaging modality?

Authors:  Ashish H Shah; Brian Snelling; Amade Bregy; Payal R Patel; Danoushka Tememe; Rita Bhatia; Evelyn Sklar; Ricardo J Komotar
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 4.130

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.