PURPOSE: Morphometry techniques were applied to quantify the normal tissue therapy response in patients receiving whole-brain radiation for intracranial malignancies. METHODS: Pre- and Post-irradiation magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data sets were retrospectively analyzed in N = 15 patients. Volume changes with respect to pre-irradiation were quantitatively measured in the cerebrum and ventricles. Measurements were correlated with the time interval from irradiation. Criteria for inclusion included craniospinal irradiation, pre-irradiation MRI, at least one follow-up MRI, and no disease progression. The brain on each image was segmented to remove the skull and registered to the initial pre-treatment scan. Average volume changes were measured using morphometry analysis of the deformation Jacobian and direct template registration-based segmentation of brain structures. RESULTS: An average cerebral volume atrophy of -0.2 and -3% 3% was measured for the deformation morphometry and direct segmentation methods, respectively. An average ventricle volume dilation of 21 and 20% was measured for the deformation morphometry and direct segmentation methods, respectively. CONCLUSION: The presented study has developed an image processing pipeline for morphometric monitoring of brain tissue volume changes as a response to radiation therapy. Results indicate that quantitative morphometric monitoring is feasible and may provide additional information in assessing response.
PURPOSE: Morphometry techniques were applied to quantify the normal tissue therapy response in patients receiving whole-brain radiation for intracranial malignancies. METHODS: Pre- and Post-irradiation magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data sets were retrospectively analyzed in N = 15 patients. Volume changes with respect to pre-irradiation were quantitatively measured in the cerebrum and ventricles. Measurements were correlated with the time interval from irradiation. Criteria for inclusion included craniospinal irradiation, pre-irradiation MRI, at least one follow-up MRI, and no disease progression. The brain on each image was segmented to remove the skull and registered to the initial pre-treatment scan. Average volume changes were measured using morphometry analysis of the deformation Jacobian and direct template registration-based segmentation of brain structures. RESULTS: An average cerebral volume atrophy of -0.2 and -3% 3% was measured for the deformation morphometry and direct segmentation methods, respectively. An average ventricle volume dilation of 21 and 20% was measured for the deformation morphometry and direct segmentation methods, respectively. CONCLUSION: The presented study has developed an image processing pipeline for morphometric monitoring of brain tissue volume changes as a response to radiation therapy. Results indicate that quantitative morphometric monitoring is feasible and may provide additional information in assessing response.
Authors: M Holden; D L Hill; E R Denton; J M Jarosz; T C Cox; T Rohlfing; J Goodey; D J Hawkes Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Keelin Murphy; Bram van Ginneken; Joseph M Reinhardt; Sven Kabus; Kai Ding; Xiang Deng; Kunlin Cao; Kaifang Du; Gary E Christensen; Vincent Garcia; Tom Vercauteren; Nicholas Ayache; Olivier Commowick; Grégoire Malandain; Ben Glocker; Nikos Paragios; Nassir Navab; Vladlena Gorbunova; Jon Sporring; Marleen de Bruijne; Xiao Han; Mattias P Heinrich; Julia A Schnabel; Mark Jenkinson; Cristian Lorenz; Marc Modat; Jamie R McClelland; Sébastien Ourselin; Sascha E A Muenzing; Max A Viergever; Dante De Nigris; D Louis Collins; Tal Arbel; Marta Peroni; Rui Li; Gregory C Sharp; Alexander Schmidt-Richberg; Jan Ehrhardt; René Werner; Dirk Smeets; Dirk Loeckx; Gang Song; Nicholas Tustison; Brian Avants; James C Gee; Marius Staring; Stefan Klein; Berend C Stoel; Martin Urschler; Manuel Werlberger; Jef Vandemeulebroucke; Simon Rit; David Sarrut; Josien P W Pluim Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2011-05-31 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: R K Mulhern; S L Palmer; W E Reddick; J O Glass; L E Kun; J Taylor; J Langston; A Gajjar Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-01-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Arthur K Liu; Karen J Marcus; Bruce Fischl; P Ellen Grant; Tina Young Poussaint; Michael J Rivkin; Peter Davis; Nancy J Tarbell; Torunn I Yock Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Manja Lehmann; Sebastian J Crutch; Gerard R Ridgway; Basil H Ridha; Josephine Barnes; Elizabeth K Warrington; Martin N Rossor; Nick C Fox Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2009-09-25 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Brian B Avants; Paul Yushkevich; John Pluta; David Minkoff; Marc Korczykowski; John Detre; James C Gee Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-10-08 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Mark Jenkinson; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Mark W Woolrich; Stephen M Smith Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Christian Hoffmann; Luitpold Distel; Stefan Knippen; Thomas Gryc; Manuel Alexander Schmidt; Rainer Fietkau; Florian Putz Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Bo Xu Ren; Isaac Huen; Zi Jun Wu; Hong Wang; Meng Yun Duan; Ilonka Guenther; K N Bhanu Prakash; Feng Ru Tang Journal: BMC Neurosci Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 3.288