Milena K Farche1, Natalia O Fachinetti1, Luciana Rp da Silva2, Larissa A Matos3, Simone Appenzeller4, Fernando Cendes5, Fabiano Reis1. 1. Departamento de Anestesiologia, Oncologia e Radiologia, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, 28132Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil. 2. Instituto Brasileiro de Neurociências e Neurotecnologia (CEPID/BRAINN), Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, 28132Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil. 3. Instituto de Matemática, Estatística e Computação Científica (IMECC), 28132Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil. 4. Departamento de Ortopedia, Reumatologia e Traumatologia, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, 28132Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil. 5. Departamento de Neurologia, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, 28132Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Conventional magnetic resonance images (MRI) has limitations in distinguishing primary from secondary brain tumors. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) allows evaluation of the concentration of metabolites in a brain lesion and, hence, better characterization of the tumor. Considering that an accurate diagnosis determines the choice of treatment, our purpose was to assess the usefulness of spectroscopy data for differentiating between primary and secondary brain neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We undertook a retrospective analysis of 61 MRI and 1H-MRS images of patients with histologically confirmed tumors (30 primary tumors and 31 metastatic tumors). The metabolite ratios of Cho/Cr and NAA/Cr at short TE were determined from spectroscopic curves, with a single voxel positioned in the enhancing tumor. Additional variables analyzed along with the metabolites, like as age and gender, allowed the construction of a logistic regression model to predict the tumor's nature. The statistical analysis was done using the R software (version 4.0.3 R Core Team, 2020). RESULTS: The mean NAA/Cr and Cho/Cr ratios were higher in secondary tumors, with a good correlation between NAA/Cr and Cho/Cr (r = 0.61). The mean age of patients with primary tumors was lower than for secondary tumors (43.9 vs 55.9, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded a cut-off value of 0.4 for the NAA/Cr ratio with an accuracy of 73.8%, a sensitivity of 73.3% and a specificity of 74.2% in predicting metastatic tumors. CONCLUSION: The model was reasonable in predicting the nature of the tumor and provides an additional tool for analyzing brain tumors.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Conventional magnetic resonance images (MRI) has limitations in distinguishing primary from secondary brain tumors. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) allows evaluation of the concentration of metabolites in a brain lesion and, hence, better characterization of the tumor. Considering that an accurate diagnosis determines the choice of treatment, our purpose was to assess the usefulness of spectroscopy data for differentiating between primary and secondary brain neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We undertook a retrospective analysis of 61 MRI and 1H-MRS images of patients with histologically confirmed tumors (30 primary tumors and 31 metastatic tumors). The metabolite ratios of Cho/Cr and NAA/Cr at short TE were determined from spectroscopic curves, with a single voxel positioned in the enhancing tumor. Additional variables analyzed along with the metabolites, like as age and gender, allowed the construction of a logistic regression model to predict the tumor's nature. The statistical analysis was done using the R software (version 4.0.3 R Core Team, 2020). RESULTS: The mean NAA/Cr and Cho/Cr ratios were higher in secondary tumors, with a good correlation between NAA/Cr and Cho/Cr (r = 0.61). The mean age of patients with primary tumors was lower than for secondary tumors (43.9 vs 55.9, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded a cut-off value of 0.4 for the NAA/Cr ratio with an accuracy of 73.8%, a sensitivity of 73.3% and a specificity of 74.2% in predicting metastatic tumors. CONCLUSION: The model was reasonable in predicting the nature of the tumor and provides an additional tool for analyzing brain tumors.
Entities:
Keywords:
Brain; glioma; magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Authors: W Hollingworth; L S Medina; R E Lenkinski; D K Shibata; B Bernal; D Zurakowski; B Comstock; J G Jarvik Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Wang; S Kim; S Chawla; R L Wolf; D E Knipp; A Vossough; D M O'Rourke; K D Judy; H Poptani; E R Melhem Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Michal Považan; Mark Mikkelsen; Adam Berrington; Pallab K Bhattacharyya; Maiken K Brix; Pieter F Buur; Kim M Cecil; Kimberly L Chan; David Y T Chen; Alexander R Craven; Koen Cuypers; Michael Dacko; Niall W Duncan; Ulrike Dydak; David A Edmondson; Gabriele Ende; Lars Ersland; Megan A Forbes; Fei Gao; Ian Greenhouse; Ashley D Harris; Naying He; Stefanie Heba; Nigel Hoggard; Tun-Wei Hsu; Jacobus F A Jansen; Alayar Kangarlu; Thomas Lange; R Marc Lebel; Yan Li; Chien-Yuan E Lin; Jy-Kang Liou; Jiing-Feng Lirng; Feng Liu; Joanna R Long; Ruoyun Ma; Celine Maes; Marta Moreno-Ortega; Scott O Murray; Sean Noah; Ralph Noeske; Michael D Noseworthy; Georg Oeltzschner; Eric C Porges; James J Prisciandaro; Nicolaas A J Puts; Timothy P L Roberts; Markus Sack; Napapon Sailasuta; Muhammad G Saleh; Michael-Paul Schallmo; Nicholas Simard; Diederick Stoffers; Stephan P Swinnen; Martin Tegenthoff; Peter Truong; Guangbin Wang; Iain D Wilkinson; Hans-Jörg Wittsack; Adam J Woods; Hongmin Xu; Fuhua Yan; Chencheng Zhang; Vadim Zipunnikov; Helge J Zöllner; Richard A E Edden; Peter B Barker Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Faris Durmo; Anna Rydelius; Sandra Cuellar Baena; Krister Askaner; Jimmy Lätt; Johan Bengzon; Elisabet Englund; Thomas L Chenevert; Isabella M Björkman-Burtscher; Pia C Sundgren Journal: Tomography Date: 2018-12
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Pieter Wesseling; Daniel J Brat; Ian A Cree; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Cynthia Hawkins; H K Ng; Stefan M Pfister; Guido Reifenberger; Riccardo Soffietti; Andreas von Deimling; David W Ellison Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 13.029