K A Smitha1, A K Gupta2, R S Jayasree3. 1. 1 Department of Imaging Sciences and Interventional Radiology, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, Kerala, India. 2. 2 Department of Neuroimaging and Interventional Radiology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, India. 3. 3 Biophotonics and Imaging Laboratory, BMT Wing, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, Kerala, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Glioma classification and characterization may be facilitated by a multiparametric approach of perfusion metrics, which could not be achieved by conventional MRI alone. Our aim is to explore the potential of relative percentage signal intensity recovery (rPSR) values, in addition to relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and relative cerebral blood flow (rCBF) of first-pass T2* dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion MRI, in differentiating high- and low-grade glioma. METHODS: This prospective study included 39 patients with low-grade and 25 patients with high-grade glioma. rPSR, rCBV and rCBF were calculated from the first-pass T2* DSC perfusion MRI. rPSR was calculated using standard software and validated with dedicated perfusion metrics analysis software. The statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Variation in rPSR, rCBV and rCBF values between low- and high-grade gliomas were statistically significant (p < 0.005). The ROC curve analysis for each of them yielded 96% sensitivity and 71.8% specificity; 88% sensitivity and 69.2% specificity; and 72% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity. The area under the curve (AUC) from the ROC curve analysis yielded 0.893, 0.852 and 0.702 for rPSR, rCBV and rCBF, respectively. The rPSR calculation with the validation software yielded 92.3% sensitivity and 72% specificity with an AUC of 0.864. CONCLUSION: rPSR inversely correlates while rCBV and rCBF values directly correlate with the tumour grade. Furthermore, the overall diagnostic performance of rPSR is better than rCBV and rCBF values. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: rPSR of T2* DSC perfusion is an indicator of blood-brain barrier status and lesion leakiness, which has not been explored yet compared with the usual haemodynamic parameters, rCBV and rCBF.
OBJECTIVE:Glioma classification and characterization may be facilitated by a multiparametric approach of perfusion metrics, which could not be achieved by conventional MRI alone. Our aim is to explore the potential of relative percentage signal intensity recovery (rPSR) values, in addition to relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and relative cerebral blood flow (rCBF) of first-pass T2* dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion MRI, in differentiating high- and low-grade glioma. METHODS: This prospective study included 39 patients with low-grade and 25 patients with high-grade glioma. rPSR, rCBV and rCBF were calculated from the first-pass T2* DSC perfusion MRI. rPSR was calculated using standard software and validated with dedicated perfusion metrics analysis software. The statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Variation in rPSR, rCBV and rCBF values between low- and high-grade gliomas were statistically significant (p < 0.005). The ROC curve analysis for each of them yielded 96% sensitivity and 71.8% specificity; 88% sensitivity and 69.2% specificity; and 72% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity. The area under the curve (AUC) from the ROC curve analysis yielded 0.893, 0.852 and 0.702 for rPSR, rCBV and rCBF, respectively. The rPSR calculation with the validation software yielded 92.3% sensitivity and 72% specificity with an AUC of 0.864. CONCLUSION: rPSR inversely correlates while rCBV and rCBF values directly correlate with the tumour grade. Furthermore, the overall diagnostic performance of rPSR is better than rCBV and rCBF values. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: rPSR of T2* DSC perfusion is an indicator of blood-brain barrier status and lesion leakiness, which has not been explored yet compared with the usual haemodynamic parameters, rCBV and rCBF.
Authors: T Sugahara; Y Korogi; M Kochi; I Ikushima; Y Shigematu; T Hirai; T Okuda; L Liang; Y Ge; Y Komohara; Y Ushio; M Takahashi Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Emma Essock-Burns; Janine M Lupo; Soonmee Cha; Mei-Yin Polley; Nicholas A Butowski; Susan M Chang; Sarah J Nelson Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: S Chinchure; B Thomas; S Wangju; M Jolappara; C Kesavadas; T R Kapilamoorthy; V V Radhakrishnan Journal: J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 3.447
Authors: Soonmee Cha; Tarik Tihan; Forrest Crawford; Nancy J Fischbein; Susan Chang; Andrew Bollen; Sarah J Nelson; Michael Prados; Mitchel S Berger; William P Dillon Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Cha; J M Lupo; M-H Chen; K R Lamborn; M W McDermott; M S Berger; S J Nelson; W P Dillon Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Faris Durmo; Jimmy Lätt; Anna Rydelius; Silke Engelholm; Sara Kinhult; Krister Askaner; Elisabet Englund; Johan Bengzon; Markus Nilsson; Isabella M Björkman-Burtscher; Thomas Chenevert; Linda Knutsson; Pia C Sundgren Journal: Tomography Date: 2018-03
Authors: Lelio Guida; Vittorio Stumpo; Jacopo Bellomo; Christiaan Hendrik Bas van Niftrik; Martina Sebök; Moncef Berhouma; Andrea Bink; Michael Weller; Zsolt Kulcsar; Luca Regli; Jorn Fierstra Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-03-10 Impact factor: 6.639