I Hwang1, S H Choi2,3, C-K Park4, T M Kim5, S-H Park6, J K Won6, I H Kim7, S-T Lee8, R-E Yoo1, K M Kang1, T J Yun1, J-H Kim1, C-H Sohn1. 1. From the Department of Radiology (I.H., S.H.C., R.-E.Y., K.M.K., T.J.Y., J.-H.K., C.-H.S.), Center for Nanoparticle Research. 2. From the Department of Radiology (I.H., S.H.C., R.-E.Y., K.M.K., T.J.Y., J.-H.K., C.-H.S.), Center for Nanoparticle Research verocay@snuh.org. 3. Institute for Basic Science, and School of Chemical and Biological Engineering (S.H.C.). 4. Department of Neurosurgery and Biomedical Research Institute (P.C.-K.). 5. Department of Internal Medicine and Cancer Research Institute (T.M.K.). 6. Department of Pathology (S.-H.P., J.K.W.). 7. Department of Radiation Oncology and Cancer Research Institute (I.H.K.). 8. Department of Neurology (S.-T.L.), Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The prognostic value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging on nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesions in patients with glioblastoma has not been thoroughly elucidated to date. We evaluated the temporal change and prognostic value for progression-free survival of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-derived pharmacokinetic parameters on nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesions in patients with glioblastoma before and after standard treatment, including gross total surgical resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 33 patients who were newly diagnosed with glioblastoma and treated with gross total surgical resection followed by concurrent chemoradiation therapy and adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide in a single institution. All patients underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging before surgery as a baseline and after completion of maximal surgical resection and concurrent chemoradiation therapy. On the whole nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesion, dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-derived pharmacokinetic parameters (volume transfer constant [K trans], volume of extravascular extracellular space [v e], and blood plasma volume [vp ]) were calculated. The Cox proportional hazards regression model analysis was performed to determine the histogram features or percentage changes of pharmacokinetic parameters related to progression-free survival. RESULTS: Baseline median K trans, baseline first quartile K trans, and posttreatment median K trans were significant independent variables, as determined by univariate analysis (P < .05). By multivariate Cox regression analysis including methylation status of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase, baseline median K trans was determined to be the significant independent variable and was negatively related to progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.48, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline median K trans from nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesions could be a potential prognostic imaging biomarker in patients undergoing gross total surgical resection followed by standard therapy for glioblastoma.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The prognostic value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging on nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesions in patients with glioblastoma has not been thoroughly elucidated to date. We evaluated the temporal change and prognostic value for progression-free survival of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-derived pharmacokinetic parameters on nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesions in patients with glioblastoma before and after standard treatment, including gross total surgical resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 33 patients who were newly diagnosed with glioblastoma and treated with gross total surgical resection followed by concurrent chemoradiation therapy and adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide in a single institution. All patients underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging before surgery as a baseline and after completion of maximal surgical resection and concurrent chemoradiation therapy. On the whole nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesion, dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-derived pharmacokinetic parameters (volume transfer constant [K trans], volume of extravascular extracellular space [v e], and blood plasma volume [vp ]) were calculated. The Cox proportional hazards regression model analysis was performed to determine the histogram features or percentage changes of pharmacokinetic parameters related to progression-free survival. RESULTS: Baseline median K trans, baseline first quartile K trans, and posttreatment median K trans were significant independent variables, as determined by univariate analysis (P < .05). By multivariate Cox regression analysis including methylation status of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase, baseline median K trans was determined to be the significant independent variable and was negatively related to progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.48, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline median K trans from nonenhancing T2 high-signal-intensity lesions could be a potential prognostic imaging biomarker in patients undergoing gross total surgical resection followed by standard therapy for glioblastoma.
Authors: Judith U Harrer; Geoff J M Parker; Hamied A Haroon; David L Buckley; Karl Embelton; Caleb Roberts; Danielle Balériaux; Alan Jackson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Karla V Ballman; Jan C Buckner; Paul D Brown; Caterina Giannini; Patrick J Flynn; Betsy R LaPlant; Kurt A Jaeckle Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2006-11-15 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Asim K Bag; Phillip C Cezayirli; Jake J Davenport; Santhosh Gaddikeri; Hassan M Fathallah-Shaykh; Alan Cantor; Xiaosi S Han; Louis B Nabors Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: L E Gaspar; B J Fisher; D R Macdonald; D V LeBer; E C Halperin; S C Schold; J G Cairncross Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1992 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Randy L Jensen; Michael L Mumert; David L Gillespie; Anita Y Kinney; Matthias C Schabel; Karen L Salzman Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: K Ina Ly; Bella Vakulenko-Lagun; Kyrre E Emblem; Yangming Ou; Xiao Da; Rebecca A Betensky; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Dan G Duda; Rakesh K Jain; Andrew S Chi; Scott R Plotkin; Tracy T Batchelor; Gregory Sorensen; Bruce R Rosen; Elizabeth R Gerstner Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Inpyeong Hwang; Seung Hong Choi; Jin Wook Kim; Eung Koo Yeon; Ji Ye Lee; Roh-Eul Yoo; Koung Mi Kang; Tae Jin Yun; Ji-Hoon Kim; Chul-Ho Sohn Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: H J Choi; S H Choi; S-H You; R-E Yoo; K M Kang; T J Yun; J-H Kim; C-H Sohn; C-K Park; S-H Park Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-02-25 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Vittorio Stumpo; Lelio Guida; 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: 2022-03-05 Impact factor: 6.639