INTRODUCTION: This study aims to determine the potential value of MR-PWI and MR-DWI to differentiate immune therapy-induced inflammatory response from recurrent glioblastoma tumour growth. Both can present as contrast-enhancing lesions on conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Patients with recurrent glioblastoma who could obtain a total or near-total resection were treated with dendritic cell immune therapy according to the HGG-IMMUNO-2003 trial. A retrospective analysis of 32 follow-up MRI examinations (mean follow-up time 21 months) in eight patients was performed for this pilot study. For the statistical analysis, the 32 examinations were divided into three groups: 0-obtained in patients that remained stable during the follow-up period, 1a-obtained in progressive-tumour patients at time points before definite progression and 1b-obtained in patients at or after progression. RESULTS: Maximum lesional rCBV ratios were highest in group 1b (Student t test, 9.25 ± 2.68; p < 0.001) and were higher in group 1a (4.87 ± 1.61, p < 0.001) compared to group 0 (1.22 ± 0.47). The minimum apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in the contrast-enhancing regions were lower in group 1a (0.62 ± 0.06 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than in group 0 (1.03 ± 0.43 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, p = 0.01) and higher in group 1b (0.76 ± 0.08) compared to 1a (p = 0.02). The minimum ADCs in the FLAIR-hyperintense region were lower in group 1a (0.62 ± 0.06, p = 0.02) compared to group 0 (0.76 ± 0.16) but not significantly different in group 1b (0.68 ± 0.07) from groups 0 and 1a (p = 0.33, p = 0.10). The mean ADCs of the FLAIR-hyperintense region and the mean ADCs of the contrast-enhancing lesion were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The maximum lesional rCBV ratios and minimum ADC values in the contrast-enhancing area are potential radiological markers to differentiate between immune therapy-induced inflammatory response and recurrent glioblastoma tumour growth in glioblastoma patients treated with immune therapy.
INTRODUCTION: This study aims to determine the potential value of MR-PWI and MR-DWI to differentiate immune therapy-induced inflammatory response from recurrent glioblastoma tumour growth. Both can present as contrast-enhancing lesions on conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS:Patients with recurrent glioblastoma who could obtain a total or near-total resection were treated with dendritic cell immune therapy according to the HGG-IMMUNO-2003 trial. A retrospective analysis of 32 follow-up MRI examinations (mean follow-up time 21 months) in eight patients was performed for this pilot study. For the statistical analysis, the 32 examinations were divided into three groups: 0-obtained in patients that remained stable during the follow-up period, 1a-obtained in progressive-tumourpatients at time points before definite progression and 1b-obtained in patients at or after progression. RESULTS: Maximum lesional rCBV ratios were highest in group 1b (Student t test, 9.25 ± 2.68; p < 0.001) and were higher in group 1a (4.87 ± 1.61, p < 0.001) compared to group 0 (1.22 ± 0.47). The minimum apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in the contrast-enhancing regions were lower in group 1a (0.62 ± 0.06 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than in group 0 (1.03 ± 0.43 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, p = 0.01) and higher in group 1b (0.76 ± 0.08) compared to 1a (p = 0.02). The minimum ADCs in the FLAIR-hyperintense region were lower in group 1a (0.62 ± 0.06, p = 0.02) compared to group 0 (0.76 ± 0.16) but not significantly different in group 1b (0.68 ± 0.07) from groups 0 and 1a (p = 0.33, p = 0.10). The mean ADCs of the FLAIR-hyperintense region and the mean ADCs of the contrast-enhancing lesion were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The maximum lesional rCBV ratios and minimum ADC values in the contrast-enhancing area are potential radiological markers to differentiate between immune therapy-induced inflammatory response and recurrent glioblastoma tumour growth in glioblastomapatients treated with immune therapy.
Authors: D Kondziolka; M Bernstein; L Resch; C H Tator; J F Fleming; R G Vanderlinden; H Schutz Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 1987-12 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Daniel A Hamstra; Thomas L Chenevert; Bradford A Moffat; Timothy D Johnson; Charles R Meyer; Suresh K Mukherji; Douglas J Quint; Stephen S Gebarski; Xiaoying Fan; Christina I Tsien; Theodore S Lawrence; Larry Junck; Alnawaz Rehemtulla; Brian D Ross Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-11-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: T Sugahara; Y Korogi; M Kochi; I Ikushima; T Hirai; T Okuda; Y Shigematsu; L Liang; Y Ge; Y Ushio; M Takahashi Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1998-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Rajan Jain; Lisa M Scarpace; Shehanaz Ellika; Roy Torcuator; Lonni R Schultz; David Hearshen; Tom Mikkelsen Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2009-10-27 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Nasuda Danchaivijitr; Adam D Waldman; Daniel J Tozer; Christopher E Benton; Gisele Brasil Caseiras; Paul S Tofts; Jeremy H Rees; H Rolf Jäger Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Lei Qin; Xiang Li; Amanda Stroiney; Jinrong Qu; Jeffrey Helgager; David A Reardon; Geoffrey S Young Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2017-01-09 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Ian F Pollack; Regina I Jakacki; Lisa H Butterfield; Ronald L Hamilton; Ashok Panigrahy; Daniel P Normolle; Angela K Connelly; Sharon Dibridge; Gary Mason; Theresa L Whiteside; Hideho Okada Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: R Ceschin; B F Kurland; S R Abberbock; B M Ellingson; H Okada; R I Jakacki; I F Pollack; A Panigrahy Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 3.825