S H Kim1, K H Cho1, S H Choi2,3,4, T M Kim5, C K Park6, S H Park7, J K Won7, I H Kim8, S T Lee9. 1. From the Departments of Radiology (S.H.K., K.H.C., S.H.C.). 2. From the Departments of Radiology (S.H.K., K.H.C., S.H.C.) verocay@snuh.org. 3. Center for Nanoparticle Research (S.H.C.), Institute for Basic Science, Seoul, Korea. 4. School of Chemical and Biological Engineering (S.H.C.), Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. 5. Departments of Internal Medicine (T.M.K.). 6. Department of Neurosurgery (C.K.P.), Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 7. Pathology (S.H.P., J.K.W.). 8. Radiation Oncology (I.H.K.), Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 9. Neurology (S.T.L.), Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Attempts have been made to quantify the microvascular leakiness of glioblastomas and use it as an imaging biomarker to predict the prognosis of the tumor. The purpose of our study was to evaluate whether the extraction fraction value from DSC-MR imaging within nonenhancing FLAIR hyperintense lesions was a better prognostic imaging biomarker than dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging parameters for patients with glioblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 102 patients with glioblastoma who received a preoperative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and DSC-MR imaging were included in this retrospective study. Patients were classified into the progression (n = 87) or nonprogression (n = 15) groups at 24 months after surgery. We extracted the means and 95th percentile values for the contrast leakage information parameters from both modalities within the nonenhancing FLAIR high-signal-intensity lesions. RESULTS: The extraction fraction 95th percentile value was higher in the progression-free survival group of >24 months than at ≤24 months. The median progression-free survival of the group with an extraction fraction 95th percentile value of >13.32 was 17 months, whereas that of the group of ≤13.32 was 12 months. In addition, it was an independent predictor variable for progression-free survival in the patients regardless of their ages and genetic information. CONCLUSIONS: The extraction fraction 95th percentile value was the only independent parameter for prognostic prediction in patients with glioblastoma among the contrast leakage information, which has no statistically significant correlations with the DCE-MR imaging parameters.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Attempts have been made to quantify the microvascular leakiness of glioblastomas and use it as an imaging biomarker to predict the prognosis of the tumor. The purpose of our study was to evaluate whether the extraction fraction value from DSC-MR imaging within nonenhancing FLAIR hyperintense lesions was a better prognostic imaging biomarker than dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging parameters for patients with glioblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 102 patients with glioblastoma who received a preoperative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and DSC-MR imaging were included in this retrospective study. Patients were classified into the progression (n = 87) or nonprogression (n = 15) groups at 24 months after surgery. We extracted the means and 95th percentile values for the contrast leakage information parameters from both modalities within the nonenhancing FLAIR high-signal-intensity lesions. RESULTS: The extraction fraction 95th percentile value was higher in the progression-free survival group of >24 months than at ≤24 months. The median progression-free survival of the group with an extraction fraction 95th percentile value of >13.32 was 17 months, whereas that of the group of ≤13.32 was 12 months. In addition, it was an independent predictor variable for progression-free survival in the patients regardless of their ages and genetic information. CONCLUSIONS: The extraction fraction 95th percentile value was the only independent parameter for prognostic prediction in patients with glioblastoma among the contrast leakage information, which has no statistically significant correlations with the DCE-MR imaging parameters.
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: Kyrre E Emblem; Atle Bjornerud; Kim Mouridsen; Ronald J H Borra; Tracy T Batchelor; Rakesh K Jain; A Gregory Sorensen Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: A Régina; M Demeule; A Laplante; J Jodoin; C Dagenais; F Berthelet; A Moghrabi; R Béliveau Journal: Cancer Metastasis Rev Date: 2001 Impact factor: 9.264
Authors: Anna K Heye; Ross D Culling; Maria Del C Valdés Hernández; Michael J Thrippleton; Joanna M Wardlaw Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2014-09-10 Impact factor: 4.881