Manuel Röhrich1, Kristin Huang2, Daniel Schrimpf2, Nathalie L Albert3, Thomas Hielscher4, Andreas von Deimling2, Ulrich Schüller5,6,7, Antonia Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss8, Uwe Haberkorn9,8. 1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. manuel.roehrich@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of Neuropathology, Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany. 4. Department of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Institute of Neuropathology, University Hospital Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 6. Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Eppendorf, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 7. Research Institute Children's Cancer Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 8. Clinical Cooperation Unit Nuclear Medicine, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 9. Division of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Dynamic 18F-FET PET/CT is a powerful tool for the diagnosis of gliomas.18F-FET PET time-activity curves (TAC) allow differentiation between histological low-grade gliomas (LGG) and high-grade gliomas (HGG). Molecular methods such as epigenetic profiling are of rising importance for glioma grading and subclassification. Here, we analysed dynamic 18F-FET PET data, and the histological and epigenetic features of 44 gliomas. METHODS: Dynamic 18F-FET PET was performed in 44 patients with newly diagnosed, untreated glioma: 10 WHO grade II glioma, 13 WHO grade III glioma and 21 glioblastoma (GBM). All patients underwent stereotactic biopsy or tumour resection after 18F-FET PET imaging. As well as histological analysis of tissue samples, DNA was subjected to epigenetic analysis using the Illumina 850 K methylation array. TACs, standardized uptake values corrected for background uptake in healthy tissue (SUVmax/BG), time to peak (TTP) and kinetic modelling parameters were correlated with histological diagnoses and with epigenetic signatures. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FET PET in relation to the tumour groups identified by histological and methylation-based analysis. RESULTS: Epigenetic profiling led to substantial tumour reclassification, with six grade II/III gliomas reclassified as GBM. Overlap of HGG-typical TACs and LGG-typical TACs was dramatically reduced when tumours were clustered on the basis of their methylation profile. SUVmax/BG values of GBM were higher than those of LGGs following both histological diagnosis and methylation-based diagnosis. The differences in TTP between GBMs and grade II/III gliomas were greater following methylation-based diagnosis than following histological diagnosis. Kinetic modeling showed that relative K1 and fractal dimension (FD) values significantly differed in histology- and methylation-based GBM and grade II/III glioma between those diagnosed histologically and those diagnosed by methylation analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed slightly greater diagnostic accuracy with methylation-based diagnosis. IDH-mutant gliomas and GBM subgroups tended to differ in their 18F-FET PET kinetics. CONCLUSION: The status of dynamic 18F-FET PET as a biologically and clinically relevant imaging modality is confirmed in the context of molecular glioma diagnosis.
PURPOSE: Dynamic 18F-FET PET/CT is a powerful tool for the diagnosis of gliomas.18F-FET PET time-activity curves (TAC) allow differentiation between histological low-grade gliomas (LGG) and high-grade gliomas (HGG). Molecular methods such as epigenetic profiling are of rising importance for glioma grading and subclassification. Here, we analysed dynamic 18F-FET PET data, and the histological and epigenetic features of 44 gliomas. METHODS: Dynamic 18F-FET PET was performed in 44 patients with newly diagnosed, untreated glioma: 10 WHO grade II glioma, 13 WHO grade III glioma and 21 glioblastoma (GBM). All patients underwent stereotactic biopsy or tumour resection after 18F-FET PET imaging. As well as histological analysis of tissue samples, DNA was subjected to epigenetic analysis using the Illumina 850 K methylation array. TACs, standardized uptake values corrected for background uptake in healthy tissue (SUVmax/BG), time to peak (TTP) and kinetic modelling parameters were correlated with histological diagnoses and with epigenetic signatures. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FET PET in relation to the tumour groups identified by histological and methylation-based analysis. RESULTS: Epigenetic profiling led to substantial tumour reclassification, with six grade II/III gliomas reclassified as GBM. Overlap of HGG-typical TACs and LGG-typical TACs was dramatically reduced when tumours were clustered on the basis of their methylation profile. SUVmax/BG values of GBM were higher than those of LGGs following both histological diagnosis and methylation-based diagnosis. The differences in TTP between GBMs and grade II/III gliomas were greater following methylation-based diagnosis than following histological diagnosis. Kinetic modeling showed that relative K1 and fractal dimension (FD) values significantly differed in histology- and methylation-based GBM and grade II/III glioma between those diagnosed histologically and those diagnosed by methylation analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed slightly greater diagnostic accuracy with methylation-based diagnosis. IDH-mutant gliomas and GBM subgroups tended to differ in their 18F-FET PET kinetics. CONCLUSION: The status of dynamic 18F-FET PET as a biologically and clinically relevant imaging modality is confirmed in the context of molecular glioma diagnosis.
Authors: Felix Sahm; Daniel Schrimpf; Damian Stichel; David T W Jones; Thomas Hielscher; Sebastian Schefzyk; Konstantin Okonechnikov; Christian Koelsche; David E Reuss; David Capper; Dominik Sturm; Hans-Georg Wirsching; Anna Sophie Berghoff; Peter Baumgarten; Annekathrin Kratz; Kristin Huang; Annika K Wefers; Volker Hovestadt; Martin Sill; Hayley P Ellis; Kathreena M Kurian; Ali Fuat Okuducu; Christine Jungk; Katharina Drueschler; Matthias Schick; Melanie Bewerunge-Hudler; Christian Mawrin; Marcel Seiz-Rosenhagen; Ralf Ketter; Matthias Simon; Manfred Westphal; Katrin Lamszus; Albert Becker; Arend Koch; Jens Schittenhelm; Elisabeth J Rushing; V Peter Collins; Stefanie Brehmer; Lukas Chavez; Michael Platten; Daniel Hänggi; Andreas Unterberg; Werner Paulus; Wolfgang Wick; Stefan M Pfister; Michel Mittelbronn; Matthias Preusser; Christel Herold-Mende; Michael Weller; Andreas von Deimling Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Dominik Sturm; Hendrik Witt; Volker Hovestadt; Dong-Anh Khuong-Quang; David T W Jones; Carolin Konermann; Elke Pfaff; Martje Tönjes; Martin Sill; Sebastian Bender; Marcel Kool; Marc Zapatka; Natalia Becker; Manuela Zucknick; Thomas Hielscher; Xiao-Yang Liu; Adam M Fontebasso; Marina Ryzhova; Steffen Albrecht; Karine Jacob; Marietta Wolter; Martin Ebinger; Martin U Schuhmann; Timothy van Meter; Michael C Frühwald; Holger Hauch; Arnulf Pekrun; Bernhard Radlwimmer; Tim Niehues; Gregor von Komorowski; Matthias Dürken; Andreas E Kulozik; Jenny Madden; Andrew Donson; Nicholas K Foreman; Rachid Drissi; Maryam Fouladi; Wolfram Scheurlen; Andreas von Deimling; Camelia Monoranu; Wolfgang Roggendorf; Christel Herold-Mende; Andreas Unterberg; Christof M Kramm; Jörg Felsberg; Christian Hartmann; Benedikt Wiestler; Wolfgang Wick; Till Milde; Olaf Witt; Anders M Lindroth; Jeremy Schwartzentruber; Damien Faury; Adam Fleming; Magdalena Zakrzewska; Pawel P Liberski; Krzysztof Zakrzewski; Peter Hauser; Miklos Garami; Almos Klekner; Laszlo Bognar; Sorana Morrissy; Florence Cavalli; Michael D Taylor; Peter van Sluis; Jan Koster; Rogier Versteeg; Richard Volckmann; Tom Mikkelsen; Kenneth Aldape; Guido Reifenberger; V Peter Collins; Jacek Majewski; Andrey Korshunov; Peter Lichter; Christoph Plass; Nada Jabado; Stefan M Pfister Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2012-10-16 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Frank Thiele; Julia Ehmer; Marc D Piroth; Michael J Eble; Heinz H Coenen; Hans-Juergen Kaiser; Wolfgang M Schaefer; Ulrich Buell; Christian Boy Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2009-08-28 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Benedikt Wiestler; David Capper; Martin Sill; David T W Jones; Volker Hovestadt; Dominik Sturm; Christian Koelsche; Anna Bertoni; Leonille Schweizer; Andrey Korshunov; Elisa K Weiß; Maximilian G Schliesser; Alexander Radbruch; Christel Herold-Mende; Patrick Roth; Andreas Unterberg; Christian Hartmann; Torsten Pietsch; Guido Reifenberger; Peter Lichter; Bernhard Radlwimmer; Michael Platten; Stefan M Pfister; Andreas von Deimling; Michael Weller; Wolfgang Wick Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2014-07-10 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Andrey Korshunov; Lukas Chavez; Tanvi Sharma; Marina Ryzhova; Daniel Schrimpf; Damian Stichel; David Capper; Dominik Sturm; Marcel Kool; Antje Habel; Bette K Kleinschmidt-DeMasters; Marc Rosenblum; Oksana Absalyamova; Andrey Golanov; Peter Lichter; Stefan M Pfister; David T W Jones; Arie Perry; Andreas von Deimling Journal: Brain Pathol Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 6.508
Authors: Nathalie L Jansen; Bogdana Suchorska; Vera Wenter; Sabina Eigenbrod; Christine Schmid-Tannwald; Andreas Zwergal; Maximilian Niyazi; Mark Drexler; Peter Bartenstein; Oliver Schnell; Jörg-Christian Tonn; Niklas Thon; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth; Christian la Fougère Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-12-30 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Olivia Kertels; Almuth F Kessler; Milena I Mihovilovic; Antje Stolzenburg; Thomas Linsenmann; Samuel Samnick; Stephanie Brändlein; Camelia Maria Monoranu; Ralf-Ingo Ernestus; Andreas K Buck; Mario Löhr; Constantin Lapa Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Aliaksandra Shymanskaya; Wieland A Worthoff; Gabriele Stoffels; Johannes Lindemeyer; Bernd Neumaier; Philipp Lohmann; Norbert Galldiks; Karl-Josef Langen; N Jon Shah Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Manuel Röhrich; Anastasia Loktev; Annika K Wefers; Annette Altmann; Daniel Paech; Sebastian Adeberg; Paul Windisch; Thomas Hielscher; Paul Flechsig; Ralf Floca; Dominik Leitz; Julius P Schuster; Peter E Huber; Jürgen Debus; Andreas von Deimling; Thomas Lindner; Uwe Haberkorn Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-08-06 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Manuel Röhrich; Dominik Leitz; Frederik M Glatting; Annika K Wefers; Oliver Weinheimer; Paul Flechsig; Nicolas Kahn; Marcus A Mall; Frederik L Giesel; Clemens Kratochwil; Peter E Huber; Andreas von Deimling; Claus Peter Heußel; Hans Ulrich Kauczor; Michael Kreuter; Uwe Haberkorn Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 11.082