C H Toh1, M Castillo2, K-C Wei3, P-Y Chen3. 1. From the Departments of Medical Imaging and Intervention (C.H.T.) eldomtoh@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology (M.C.), University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 3. Neurosurgery (K.-C.W., P.-Y.C.), Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Increased contrast enhancement has been used as a marker of malignant transformation in low-grade gliomas. This marker has been found to have limited accuracy because many low-grade gliomas with increased contrast enhancement remain grade II. We aimed to investigate whether MR spectroscopy can contribute to the diagnosis of malignant transformation in low-grade gliomas with increased contrast enhancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with low-grade gliomas who had contemporaneous MR spectroscopy and histopathology for tumor regions with increased contrast enhancement between 2004 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical data collected were sex and age, Karnofsky Performance Scale, histologic subtypes, isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 mutation status, disease duration, adjuvant therapy, and post-radiation therapy duration. Imaging data collected were contrast-enhancement size, whole-tumor size, MR spectroscopy metabolite ratios, and tumor grades of regions with increased contrast enhancement. Diagnostic values of these factors on malignant transformation of low-grade gliomas were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients with 96 MR spectroscopy studies were included. Tumor grades associated with increased contrast enhancement were grade II (n = 42), grade III (n = 27), and grade IV (n = 27). On multivariate analysis, the NAA/Cho ratio was the only significant factor (P < .001; OR, 7.1; 95% CI, 3.2-16.1) diagnostic of malignant transformation. With 0.222 as the cutoff value, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of NAA/Cho for diagnosing malignant transformation were 94.4%, 83.3%, and 89.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MR spectroscopy complements conventional MR imaging in the diagnosis of malignant transformation in a subgroup of low-grade gliomas with increased contrast enhancement.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Increased contrast enhancement has been used as a marker of malignant transformation in low-grade gliomas. This marker has been found to have limited accuracy because many low-grade gliomas with increased contrast enhancement remain grade II. We aimed to investigate whether MR spectroscopy can contribute to the diagnosis of malignant transformation in low-grade gliomas with increased contrast enhancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with low-grade gliomas who had contemporaneous MR spectroscopy and histopathology for tumor regions with increased contrast enhancement between 2004 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical data collected were sex and age, Karnofsky Performance Scale, histologic subtypes, isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 mutation status, disease duration, adjuvant therapy, and post-radiation therapy duration. Imaging data collected were contrast-enhancement size, whole-tumor size, MR spectroscopy metabolite ratios, and tumor grades of regions with increased contrast enhancement. Diagnostic values of these factors on malignant transformation of low-grade gliomas were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients with 96 MR spectroscopy studies were included. Tumor grades associated with increased contrast enhancement were grade II (n = 42), grade III (n = 27), and grade IV (n = 27). On multivariate analysis, the NAA/Cho ratio was the only significant factor (P < .001; OR, 7.1; 95% CI, 3.2-16.1) diagnostic of malignant transformation. With 0.222 as the cutoff value, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of NAA/Cho for diagnosing malignant transformation were 94.4%, 83.3%, and 89.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MR spectroscopy complements conventional MR imaging in the diagnosis of malignant transformation in a subgroup of low-grade gliomas with increased contrast enhancement.
Authors: Martin C Tom; Deborah Y J Park; Kailin Yang; C Marc Leyrer; Wei Wei; Xuefei Jia; Vamsi Varra; Jennifer S Yu; Samuel T Chao; Ehsan H Balagamwala; John H Suh; Michael A Vogelbaum; Gene H Barnett; Richard A Prayson; Glen H J Stevens; David M Peereboom; Manmeet S Ahluwalia; Erin S Murphy Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2019-08-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David Schiff; Martin Van den Bent; Michael A Vogelbaum; Wolfgang Wick; C Ryan Miller; Martin Taphoorn; Whitney Pope; Paul D Brown; Michael Platten; Rakesh Jalali; Terri Armstrong; Patrick Y Wen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: M J van den Bent; J S Wefel; D Schiff; M J B Taphoorn; K Jaeckle; L Junck; T Armstrong; A Choucair; A D Waldman; T Gorlia; M Chamberlain; B G Baumert; M A Vogelbaum; D R Macdonald; D A Reardon; P Y Wen; S M Chang; A H Jacobs Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Eiji Matsusue; James R Fink; Jason K Rockhill; Toshihide Ogawa; Kenneth R Maravilla Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2009-10-16 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Erin S Murphy; Charles M Leyrer; Michael Parsons; John H Suh; Samuel T Chao; Jennifer S Yu; Rupesh Kotecha; Xuefei Jia; David M Peereboom; Richard A Prayson; Glen H J Stevens; Gene H Barnett; Michael A Vogelbaum; Manmeet S Ahluwalia Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Gülin Oz; Jeffry R Alger; Peter B Barker; Robert Bartha; Alberto Bizzi; Chris Boesch; Patrick J Bolan; Kevin M Brindle; Cristina Cudalbu; Alp Dinçer; Ulrike Dydak; Uzay E Emir; Jens Frahm; Ramón Gilberto González; Stephan Gruber; Rolf Gruetter; Rakesh K Gupta; Arend Heerschap; Anke Henning; Hoby P Hetherington; Franklyn A Howe; Petra S Hüppi; Ralph E Hurd; Kantarci Kantarci; Dennis W J Klomp; Roland Kreis; Marijn J Kruiskamp; Martin O Leach; Alexander P Lin; Peter R Luijten; Malgorzata Marjańska; Andrew A Maudsley; Dieter J Meyerhoff; Carolyn E Mountford; Sarah J Nelson; M Necmettin Pamir; Jullie W Pan; Andrew C Peet; Harish Poptani; Stefan Posse; Petra J W Pouwels; Eva-Maria Ratai; Brian D Ross; Tom W Scheenen; Christian Schuster; Ian C P Smith; Brian J Soher; Ivan Tkáč; Daniel B Vigneron; Risto A Kauppinen Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 11.105