BACKGROUND: According to the Response Assessment in Neurooncology (RANO) criteria, significant nonenhancing signal increase in T2-weighted images qualifies for progression in high-grade glioma (T2-progress), even if there is no change in the contrast-enhancing tumor portion. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the frequency of isolated T2-progress and its predictive value on subsequent T1-progress, as determined by a T2 signal increase of 15% or 25%, respectively. The frequency of T2-progress was correlated with antiangiogenic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MRI follow-up examinations (n = 777) of 144 patients with histologically proven glioblastoma were assessed for contrast-enhanced T1 and T2-weighted images. Examinations were classified as T1-progress, T2-progress with 15% or 25% T2-signal increase, stable disease, or partial or complete response. RESULTS: Thirty-five examinations revealed exclusive T2-progress using the 15% criterion, and only 2 examinations qualified for the 25% criterion; 61.8% of the scans presenting T2-progress and 31.5% of the scans presenting stable disease revealed T1-progress in the next follow-up examination. The χ(2) test showed a highly significant correlation (P < .001) between T2-progress, with the 15% criterion and subsequent T1-progress. No correlation between antiangiogenic therapy and T2-progress was shown. CONCLUSION: Tumor progression, as determined by both contrast-enhanced T1 and T2 sequences is more frequently diagnosed than when considering only contrast-enhanced T1 sequences. Definition of T2-progress by a 15% T2-signal increase criterion is superior to a 25% criterion. The missing correlation of T2-progress and antiangiogenic therapy supports the hypothesis of T2-progress as part of the natural course of the tumor disease.
BACKGROUND: According to the Response Assessment in Neurooncology (RANO) criteria, significant nonenhancing signal increase in T2-weighted images qualifies for progression in high-grade glioma (T2-progress), even if there is no change in the contrast-enhancing tumor portion. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the frequency of isolated T2-progress and its predictive value on subsequent T1-progress, as determined by a T2 signal increase of 15% or 25%, respectively. The frequency of T2-progress was correlated with antiangiogenic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MRI follow-up examinations (n = 777) of 144 patients with histologically proven glioblastoma were assessed for contrast-enhanced T1 and T2-weighted images. Examinations were classified as T1-progress, T2-progress with 15% or 25% T2-signal increase, stable disease, or partial or complete response. RESULTS: Thirty-five examinations revealed exclusive T2-progress using the 15% criterion, and only 2 examinations qualified for the 25% criterion; 61.8% of the scans presenting T2-progress and 31.5% of the scans presenting stable disease revealed T1-progress in the next follow-up examination. The χ(2) test showed a highly significant correlation (P < .001) between T2-progress, with the 15% criterion and subsequent T1-progress. No correlation between antiangiogenic therapy and T2-progress was shown. CONCLUSION:Tumor progression, as determined by both contrast-enhanced T1 and T2 sequences is more frequently diagnosed than when considering only contrast-enhanced T1 sequences. Definition of T2-progress by a 15% T2-signal increase criterion is superior to a 25% criterion. The missing correlation of T2-progress and antiangiogenic therapy supports the hypothesis of T2-progress as part of the natural course of the tumor disease.
Authors: Patrick Y Wen; David R Macdonald; David A Reardon; Timothy F Cloughesy; A Gregory Sorensen; Evanthia Galanis; John Degroot; Wolfgang Wick; Mark R Gilbert; Andrew B Lassman; Christina Tsien; Tom Mikkelsen; Eric T Wong; Marc C Chamberlain; Roger Stupp; Kathleen R Lamborn; Michael A Vogelbaum; Martin J van den Bent; Susan M Chang Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Antje Wick; Nils Dörner; Navina Schäfer; Silvia Hofer; Sabine Heiland; Daniela Schemmer; Michael Platten; Michael Weller; Martin Bendszus; Wolfgang Wick Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: P Kunkel; U Ulbricht; P Bohlen; M A Brockmann; R Fillbrandt; D Stavrou; M Westphal; K Lamszus Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: E T Wong; K R Hess; M J Gleason; K A Jaeckle; A P Kyritsis; M D Prados; V A Levin; W K Yung Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Elizabeth R Gerstner; Poe-Jou Chen; Patrick Y Wen; Rakesh K Jain; Tracy T Batchelor; Gregory Sorensen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2010-01-22 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Jerrold L Boxerman; Zheng Zhang; Yair Safriel; Mykol Larvie; Bradley S Snyder; Rajan Jain; T Linda Chi; A Gregory Sorensen; Mark R Gilbert; Daniel P Barboriak Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Benjamin M Ellingson; Albert Lai; Huytram N Nguyen; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Whitney B Pope; Timothy F Cloughesy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-04-21 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Elizabeth R Gerstner; Xiaobu Ye; Dan G Duda; Michael A Levine; Tom Mikkelsen; Thomas J Kaley; Jeffrey J Olson; Burt L Nabors; Manmeet S Ahluwalia; Patrick Y Wen; Rakesh K Jain; Tracy T Batchelor; Stuart Grossman Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2015-05-24 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Patrick Y Wen; Timothy F Cloughesy; Benjamin M Ellingson; David A Reardon; Howard A Fine; Lauren Abrey; Karla Ballman; Martin Bendszuz; Jan Buckner; Susan M Chang; Michael D Prados; Whitney B Pope; Alma Gregory Sorensen; Martin van den Bent; Wai-Kwan Alfred Yung Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Kevin Leu; Whitney B Pope; Timothy F Cloughesy; Albert Lai; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Wei Chen; Linda M Liau; Benjamin M Ellingson Journal: CNS Oncol Date: 2013-01