RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to correlate the status of magnetic resonance contrast enhancement with immunohistologic vascular parameters such as microvascular cellular proliferation (MVCP), microvascular density (MVD), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2) expression, and World Health Organization (WHO) grade obtained from image-guided biopsy specimens. We also compared perfusion computed tomography (PCT) parameters such as cerebral blood volume (CBV), cerebral blood flow (CBF), and permeability surface area-product (PS) with the presence or absence of contrast enhancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 26 image-guided biopsy specimens in 16 patients with treatment naive gliomas were obtained from contrast-enhancing (CE) and nonenhancing (NE) regions of the glioma. Contrast enhancement status was correlated with MVD, MVCP, VEGFR-2 expression, and WHO grade obtained from the biopsy specimen as well as with the PCT parameters. RESULTS: Contrast enhancement showed statistically significant correlation with MVCP (P = .003) and PS (P = .007) when compared with various immunohistologic and perfusion vascular parameters. WHO grade of the biopsy specimen showed statistically significant correlation with contrast enhancement (P = .002), MVCP (P < .001), and PS values (P = .028). CONCLUSION: Contrast enhancement in gliomas is primarily from a break in blood-brain barrier as evidenced by its correlation with PS and MVCP, whereas it was not statistically correlated with CBV and MVD even though it showed a positive trend. Contrast enhancement also showed significant correlation with WHO grade suggesting a biopsy from CE region in a heterogeneous glioma probably will still yield the most aggressive part of the glioma is also shown by its association with MVCP and PS estimates.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to correlate the status of magnetic resonance contrast enhancement with immunohistologic vascular parameters such as microvascular cellular proliferation (MVCP), microvascular density (MVD), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2) expression, and World Health Organization (WHO) grade obtained from image-guided biopsy specimens. We also compared perfusion computed tomography (PCT) parameters such as cerebral blood volume (CBV), cerebral blood flow (CBF), and permeability surface area-product (PS) with the presence or absence of contrast enhancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 26 image-guided biopsy specimens in 16 patients with treatment naive gliomas were obtained from contrast-enhancing (CE) and nonenhancing (NE) regions of the glioma. Contrast enhancement status was correlated with MVD, MVCP, VEGFR-2 expression, and WHO grade obtained from the biopsy specimen as well as with the PCT parameters. RESULTS: Contrast enhancement showed statistically significant correlation with MVCP (P = .003) and PS (P = .007) when compared with various immunohistologic and perfusion vascular parameters. WHO grade of the biopsy specimen showed statistically significant correlation with contrast enhancement (P = .002), MVCP (P < .001), and PS values (P = .028). CONCLUSION: Contrast enhancement in gliomas is primarily from a break in blood-brain barrier as evidenced by its correlation with PS and MVCP, whereas it was not statistically correlated with CBV and MVD even though it showed a positive trend. Contrast enhancement also showed significant correlation with WHO grade suggesting a biopsy from CE region in a heterogeneous glioma probably will still yield the most aggressive part of the glioma is also shown by its association with MVCP and PS estimates.
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: Ramon F Barajas; Joanna J Phillips; Rupa Parvataneni; Annette Molinaro; Emma Essock-Burns; Gabriela Bourne; Andrew T Parsa; Manish K Aghi; Michael W McDermott; Mitchel S Berger; Soonmee Cha; Susan M Chang; Sarah J Nelson Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Emma Essock-Burns; Joanna J Phillips; Annette M Molinaro; Janine M Lupo; Soonmee Cha; Susan M Chang; Sarah J Nelson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Eric C Woolf; Kara L Curley; Qingwei Liu; Gregory H Turner; Julie A Charlton; Mark C Preul; Adrienne C Scheck Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-17 Impact factor: 3.240