Sanaz Beig Zali1, Farbod Alinezhad2, Mahnaz Ranjkesh3, Mohammad H Daghighi3, Masoud Poureisa3. 1. Neuroscience Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran. 2. Student Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran. 3. Department of Radiology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme are two of the most common malignant brain neoplasms. There are many difficulties in distinguishing these diseases from each other. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the mean apparent diffusion coefficient and absolute standard deviation derived from apparent diffusion coefficient measurements can be used to differentiate glioblastoma multiforme from brain metastasis based on cellularity levels. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Magnetic resonance images of 34 patients with histologically verified brain tumors were evaluated retrospectively. Apparent diffusion coefficient and standard deviation values were measured in the enhancing tumor, peritumoral region, and contralateral healthy white matter. Then, to determine whether there was a statistical difference between brain metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme, we analyzed different variables between the two groups. RESULTS: Neither mean apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios nor standard deviation values and ratios were significantly different between glioblastoma multiforme and brain metastasis. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the logistic model with backward stepwise feature selection yielded an area under the curve of 0.77, a specificity of 84%, a sensitivity of 67%, a positive predictive value of 83.33%, and a negative predictive value of 78.26% for distinguishing between glioblastoma multiforme and brain metastasis. The absolute standard deviation and standard deviation ratios were significantly higher in the peritumoral edema compared to the tumor region in each case. CONCLUSION: Apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios, as well as standard deviation values and ratios in peritumoral edema, cannot be used to differentiate edema with infiltration of tumor cells from vasogenic edema. However, standard deviation values could successfully characterize areas of peritumoral edema from the tumoral region in each case.
BACKGROUND: Brain metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme are two of the most common malignant brain neoplasms. There are many difficulties in distinguishing these diseases from each other. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the mean apparent diffusion coefficient and absolute standard deviation derived from apparent diffusion coefficient measurements can be used to differentiate glioblastoma multiforme from brain metastasis based on cellularity levels. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Magnetic resonance images of 34 patients with histologically verified brain tumors were evaluated retrospectively. Apparent diffusion coefficient and standard deviation values were measured in the enhancing tumor, peritumoral region, and contralateral healthy white matter. Then, to determine whether there was a statistical difference between brain metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme, we analyzed different variables between the two groups. RESULTS: Neither mean apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios nor standard deviation values and ratios were significantly different between glioblastoma multiforme and brain metastasis. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the logistic model with backward stepwise feature selection yielded an area under the curve of 0.77, a specificity of 84%, a sensitivity of 67%, a positive predictive value of 83.33%, and a negative predictive value of 78.26% for distinguishing between glioblastoma multiforme and brain metastasis. The absolute standard deviation and standard deviation ratios were significantly higher in the peritumoral edema compared to the tumor region in each case. CONCLUSION: Apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios, as well as standard deviation values and ratios in peritumoral edema, cannot be used to differentiate edema with infiltration of tumor cells from vasogenic edema. However, standard deviation values could successfully characterize areas of peritumoral edema from the tumoral region in each case.
Authors: K Kono; Y Inoue; K Nakayama; M Shakudo; M Morino; K Ohata; K Wakasa; R Yamada Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Katalin Fábián; Márton Gyulai; József Furák; Péter Várallyay; Márta Jäckel; Krisztina Bogos; Balázs Döme; Judit Pápay; József Tímár; Zoltán Szállási; Judit Moldvay Journal: Oncology Date: 2016-08-26 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Riyadh N Al-Okaili; Jaroslaw Krejza; John H Woo; Ronald L Wolf; Donald M O'Rourke; Kevin D Judy; Harish Poptani; Elias R Melhem Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kirstie S Opstad; Mary M Murphy; Peter R Wilkins; B Anthony Bell; John R Griffiths; Franklyn A Howe Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 4.813