BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Tumor angiogenesis is very heterogeneous and in vivo correlation of perfusion imaging parameters with angiogenic markers can help in better understanding the role of perfusion imaging as an imaging biomarker. The purpose of this study was to correlate PCT parameters such as CBV and PS with histologic and molecular angiogenic markers in gliomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six image-guided biopsy specimens in 23 patients with treatment-naive gliomas underwent PCT examinations. We correlated MVD, MVCP, VEGFR-2 expression, tumor cellularity, and WHO grade of the image-guided biopsy specimens with the PCT parameters. Histologic sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin, CD34, and VEGFR-2 and examined under a light microscope. These histologic and molecular angiogenic markers were correlated with perfusion parameters of the region of interest corresponding to the biopsy specimen. Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple regression analyses by using clustering methods were performed to assess these correlations. RESULTS: CBV showed a significant positive correlation with MVD (r = 0.596, P < .001), whereas PS showed a significant positive correlation with MVCP (r = 0.546, P = .001). Both CBV (r = 0.373, P = .031) and PS (r = 0.452, P = .039) also showed a significant correlation with WHO grade. VEGFR-2 positive specimens showed higher PS and CBV; however, neither was statistically significant at the .05 level. CONCLUSIONS: CBV showed a significant positive correlation with MVD, whereas PS showed a significant positive correlation with MVCP, suggesting that these 2 perfusion parameters represent different aspects of tumor vessels; hence, in vivo evaluation of these could be important in a better understanding of tumor angiogenesis.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Tumor angiogenesis is very heterogeneous and in vivo correlation of perfusion imaging parameters with angiogenic markers can help in better understanding the role of perfusion imaging as an imaging biomarker. The purpose of this study was to correlate PCT parameters such as CBV and PS with histologic and molecular angiogenic markers in gliomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six image-guided biopsy specimens in 23 patients with treatment-naive gliomas underwent PCT examinations. We correlated MVD, MVCP, VEGFR-2 expression, tumor cellularity, and WHO grade of the image-guided biopsy specimens with the PCT parameters. Histologic sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin, CD34, and VEGFR-2 and examined under a light microscope. These histologic and molecular angiogenic markers were correlated with perfusion parameters of the region of interest corresponding to the biopsy specimen. Pearson correlation coefficients and multiple regression analyses by using clustering methods were performed to assess these correlations. RESULTS:CBV showed a significant positive correlation with MVD (r = 0.596, P < .001), whereas PS showed a significant positive correlation with MVCP (r = 0.546, P = .001). Both CBV (r = 0.373, P = .031) and PS (r = 0.452, P = .039) also showed a significant correlation with WHO grade. VEGFR-2 positive specimens showed higher PS and CBV; however, neither was statistically significant at the .05 level. CONCLUSIONS:CBV showed a significant positive correlation with MVD, whereas PS showed a significant positive correlation with MVCP, suggesting that these 2 perfusion parameters represent different aspects of tumor vessels; hence, in vivo evaluation of these could be important in a better understanding of tumor angiogenesis.
Authors: R Jain; S K Ellika; L Scarpace; L R Schultz; J P Rock; J Gutierrez; S C Patel; J Ewing; T Mikkelsen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-01-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Michael H Lev; Yelda Ozsunar; John W Henson; Amjad A Rasheed; Glenn D Barest; Griffith R Harsh; Markus M Fitzek; E Antonio Chiocca; James D Rabinov; Andrew N Csavoy; Bruce R Rosen; Fred H Hochberg; Pamela W Schaefer; R Gilberto Gonzalez Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S K Ellika; R Jain; S C Patel; L Scarpace; L R Schultz; J P Rock; T Mikkelsen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-09-24 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Efstathios Karathanasis; Leslie Chan; Lohitash Karumbaiah; Kathleen McNeeley; Carl J D'Orsi; Ananth V Annapragada; Ioannis Sechopoulos; Ravi V Bellamkonda Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Chih-Chun Wu; Rajan Jain; Lucidio Neto; Seema Patel; Laila M Poisson; Jonathan Serrano; Victor Ng; Sohil H Patel; Dimitris G Placantonakis; David Zagzag; John Golfinos; Andrew S Chi; Matija Snuderl Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2019-05-27 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: M Essig; N Anzalone; S E Combs; À Dörfler; S-K Lee; P Picozzi; A Rovira; M Weller; M Law Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Pejman Jabehdar Maralani; Elias R Melhem; Sumei Wang; Edward H Herskovits; Matthew R Voluck; Sang Joon Kim; Kim O Learned; Donald M O'Rourke; Suyash Mohan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: R Jain; L Poisson; J Narang; L Scarpace; M L Rosenblum; S Rempel; T Mikkelsen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Gregory A Christoforidis; Ming Yang; Amir Abduljalil; Abhik R Chaudhury; Herbert B Newton; John M McGregor; Clara R Epstein; William T C Yuh; Sydeaka Watson; Pierre-Marie L Robitaille Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Melissa A Prah; Mona M Al-Gizawiy; Wade M Mueller; Elizabeth J Cochran; Raymond G Hoffmann; Jennifer M Connelly; Kathleen M Schmainda Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 4.130