Rachel W Chan1, Hanbo Chen2, Sten Myrehaug2, Eshetu G Atenafu3, Greg J Stanisz4,5,6, James Stewart2, Pejman Jabehdar Maralani7, Aimee K M Chan7, Shadi Daghighi7, Mark Ruschin2, Sunit Das8, James Perry9, Gregory J Czarnota4,2,5, Arjun Sahgal4,2, Angus Z Lau4,5. 1. Physical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. rchan@sri.utoronto.ca. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. Department of Biostatistics, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 4. Physical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. 5. Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 6. Department of Neurosurgery and Pediatric Neurosurgery, Medical University, Lublin, Poland. 7. Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 8. Division of Neurosurgery, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. Division of Neurology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Quantitative MRI (qMRI) was performed using a 1.5T protocol that includes a novel chemical exchange saturation transfer/magnetization transfer (CEST/MT) approach. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine if qMRI metrics at baseline, at the 10th and 20th fraction during a 30 fraction/6 week standard chemoradiation (CRT) schedule, and at 1 month following treatment could be an early indicator of response for glioblastoma (GBM). METHODS: The study included 51 newly diagnosed GBM patients. Four regions-of-interest (ROI) were analyzed: (i) the radiation defined clinical target volume (CTV), (ii) radiation defined gross tumor volume (GTV), (iii) enhancing-tumor regions, and (iv) FLAIR-hyperintense regions. Quantitative CEST, MT, T1 and T2 parameters were compared between those patients progressing within 6.9 months (early), and those progressing after CRT (late), using mixed modelling. Exploratory predictive modelling was performed to identify significant predictors of early progression using a multivariable LASSO model. RESULTS: Results were dependent on the specific tumor ROI analyzed and the imaging time point. The baseline CEST asymmetry within the CTV was significantly higher in the early progression cohort. Other significant predictors included the T2 of the MT pools (for semi-solid at fraction 20 and water at 1 month after CRT), the exchange rate (at fraction 20) and the MGMT methylation status. CONCLUSIONS: We observe the potential for multiparametric qMRI, including a novel pulsed CEST/MT approach, to show potential in distinguishing early from late progression GBM cohorts. Ultimately, the goal is to personalize therapeutic decisions and treatment adaptation based on non-invasive imaging-based biomarkers.
PURPOSE: Quantitative MRI (qMRI) was performed using a 1.5T protocol that includes a novel chemical exchange saturation transfer/magnetization transfer (CEST/MT) approach. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine if qMRI metrics at baseline, at the 10th and 20th fraction during a 30 fraction/6 week standard chemoradiation (CRT) schedule, and at 1 month following treatment could be an early indicator of response for glioblastoma (GBM). METHODS: The study included 51 newly diagnosed GBM patients. Four regions-of-interest (ROI) were analyzed: (i) the radiation defined clinical target volume (CTV), (ii) radiation defined gross tumor volume (GTV), (iii) enhancing-tumor regions, and (iv) FLAIR-hyperintense regions. Quantitative CEST, MT, T1 and T2 parameters were compared between those patients progressing within 6.9 months (early), and those progressing after CRT (late), using mixed modelling. Exploratory predictive modelling was performed to identify significant predictors of early progression using a multivariable LASSO model. RESULTS: Results were dependent on the specific tumor ROI analyzed and the imaging time point. The baseline CEST asymmetry within the CTV was significantly higher in the early progression cohort. Other significant predictors included the T2 of the MT pools (for semi-solid at fraction 20 and water at 1 month after CRT), the exchange rate (at fraction 20) and the MGMT methylation status. CONCLUSIONS: We observe the potential for multiparametric qMRI, including a novel pulsed CEST/MT approach, to show potential in distinguishing early from late progression GBM cohorts. Ultimately, the goal is to personalize therapeutic decisions and treatment adaptation based on non-invasive imaging-based biomarkers.
Authors: Craig K Jones; Michael J Schlosser; Peter C M van Zijl; Martin G Pomper; Xavier Golay; Jinyuan Zhou Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Matthew Koshy; John L Villano; Therese A Dolecek; Andrew Howard; Usama Mahmood; Steven J Chmura; Ralph R Weichselbaum; Bridget J McCarthy Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2011-10-09 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Susan K Hobbs; Gongyi Shi; Ron Homer; Griff Harsh; Scott W Atlas; Mark D Bednarski Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: F A Howe; S J Barton; S A Cudlip; M Stubbs; D E Saunders; M Murphy; P Wilkins; K S Opstad; V L Doyle; M A McLean; B A Bell; J R Griffiths Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Yi Lao; Dan Ruan; April Vassantachart; Zhaoyang Fan; Jason C Ye; Eric L Chang; Robert Chin; Tania Kaprealian; Gabriel Zada; Mark S Shiroishi; Ke Sheng; Wensha Yang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-12-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Nikolai J Mickevicius; Joshua P Kim; Jiwei Zhao; Zachary S Morris; Newton J Hurst; Carri K Glide-Hurst Journal: Med Phys Date: 2021-09-18 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Lee Sze Foo; George Harston; Amit Mehndiratta; Wun-She Yap; Yan Chai Hum; Khin Wee Lai; Shahizon Azura Mohamed Mukari; Faizah Mohd Zaki; Yee Kai Tee Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2021-08
Authors: Jinyuan Zhou; Moritz Zaiss; Linda Knutsson; Phillip Zhe Sun; Sung Soo Ahn; Silvio Aime; Peter Bachert; Jaishri O Blakeley; Kejia Cai; Michael A Chappell; Min Chen; Daniel F Gochberg; Steffen Goerke; Hye-Young Heo; Shanshan Jiang; Tao Jin; Seong-Gi Kim; John Laterra; Daniel Paech; Mark D Pagel; Ji Eun Park; Ravinder Reddy; Akihiko Sakata; Sabine Sartoretti-Schefer; A Dean Sherry; Seth A Smith; Greg J Stanisz; Pia C Sundgren; Osamu Togao; Moriel Vandsburger; Zhibo Wen; Yin Wu; Yi Zhang; Wenzhen Zhu; Zhongliang Zu; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Catherine Coolens; Matt N Gwilliam; Paula Alcaide-Leon; Isabella Maria de Freitas Faria; Fabio Ynoe de Moraes Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-05-23 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Petra J van Houdt; Hina Saeed; Daniela Thorwarth; Clifton D Fuller; William A Hall; Brigid A McDonald; Amita Shukla-Dave; Ernst S Kooreman; Marielle E P Philippens; Astrid L H M W van Lier; Rick Keesman; Faisal Mahmood; Catherine Coolens; Teodor Stanescu; Jihong Wang; Neelam Tyagi; Andreas Wetscherek; Uulke A van der Heide Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 10.002