Yoon Seong Choi1, Sung Soo Ahn2, Seung-Koo Lee1, Jong Hee Chang3, Seok-Gu Kang3, Se Hoon Kim4, Jinyuan Zhou5. 1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, College of Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, College of Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, Korea. SUNGSOO@yuhs.ac. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Pathology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 5. Division of MRI Research, Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the added value of amide proton transfer (APT) imaging to the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and the relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) from perfusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for discriminating between high- and low-grade gliomas. METHODS: Forty-six consecutive adult patients with diffuse gliomas who underwent preoperative APT imaging, DTI and perfusion MRI were enrolled. APT signals were compared according to the World Health Organization grade. The diagnostic ability and added value of the APT signal to the ADC and rCBV for discriminating between low- and high-grade gliomas were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses and integrated discrimination improvement. RESULTS: The APT signal increased as the glioma grade increased. The discrimination abilities of the APT, ADC and rCBV values were not significantly different. Using both the APT signal and ADC significantly improved discrimination vs. the ADC alone (area under the ROC curve [AUC], 0.888 vs. 0.910; P = 0.007), whereas using both the APT signal and rCBV did not improve discrimination vs. the rCBV alone (AUC, 0.927 vs. 0.923; P = 0.222). CONCLUSIONS: APT imaging may be a useful imaging biomarker that adds value to the ADC for discriminating between low- and high-grade gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Higher APT values were correlated with higher glioma grades. • Adding the APT signal to the ADC improved glioma grading. • Adding the APT signal to rCBV did not improve glioma grading. • APT is a useful adjunct to the ADC for glioma grading.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the added value of amide proton transfer (APT) imaging to the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and the relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) from perfusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for discriminating between high- and low-grade gliomas. METHODS: Forty-six consecutive adult patients with diffuse gliomas who underwent preoperative APT imaging, DTI and perfusion MRI were enrolled. APT signals were compared according to the World Health Organization grade. The diagnostic ability and added value of the APT signal to the ADC and rCBV for discriminating between low- and high-grade gliomas were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses and integrated discrimination improvement. RESULTS: The APT signal increased as the glioma grade increased. The discrimination abilities of the APT, ADC and rCBV values were not significantly different. Using both the APT signal and ADC significantly improved discrimination vs. the ADC alone (area under the ROC curve [AUC], 0.888 vs. 0.910; P = 0.007), whereas using both the APT signal and rCBV did not improve discrimination vs. the rCBV alone (AUC, 0.927 vs. 0.923; P = 0.222). CONCLUSIONS:APT imaging may be a useful imaging biomarker that adds value to the ADC for discriminating between low- and high-grade gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Higher APT values were correlated with higher glioma grades. • Adding the APT signal to the ADC improved glioma grading. • Adding the APT signal to rCBV did not improve glioma grading. • APT is a useful adjunct to the ADC for glioma grading.
Entities:
Keywords:
Amide proton transfer imaging; Brain tumour; Chemical exchange saturation transfer; Glioma; Magnetic resonance imaging
Authors: W B Pope; A Lai; R Mehta; H J Kim; J Qiao; J R Young; X Xue; J Goldin; M S Brown; P L Nghiemphu; A Tran; T F Cloughesy Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Gabriele Pöpperl; Friedrich W Kreth; Jan H Mehrkens; Jochen Herms; Klaus Seelos; Walter Koch; Franz J Gildehaus; Hans A Kretzschmar; Jörg C Tonn; Klaus Tatsch Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-09-01 Impact factor: 9.236
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: Craig K Jones; Alan Huang; Jiadi Xu; Richard A E Edden; Michael Schär; Jun Hua; Nikita Oskolkov; Domenico Zacà; Jinyuan Zhou; Michael T McMahon; Jay J Pillai; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Shanshan Jiang; Tianyu Zou; Charles G Eberhart; Maria A V Villalobos; Hye-Young Heo; Yi Zhang; Yu Wang; Xianlong Wang; Hao Yu; Yongxing Du; Peter C M van Zijl; Zhibo Wen; Jinyuan Zhou Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-07-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Daniel Paech; Constantin Dreher; Sebastian Regnery; Jan-Eric Meissner; Steffen Goerke; Johannes Windschuh; Johanna Oberhollenzer; Miriam Schultheiss; Katerina Deike-Hofmann; Sebastian Bickelhaupt; Alexander Radbruch; Moritz Zaiss; Andreas Unterberg; Wolfgang Wick; Martin Bendszus; Peter Bachert; Mark E Ladd; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-02-26 Impact factor: 5.315