Brain Gliomas: Multicenter Standardized Assessment of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced and Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MR Images.

Purpose To evaluate the feasibility of a standardized protocol for acquisition and analysis of dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) and dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in a multicenter clinical setting and to verify its accuracy in predicting glioma grade according to the new World Health Organization 2016 classification. Materials and Methods The local research ethics committees of all centers approved the study, and informed consent was obtained from patients. One hundred patients with glioma were prospectively examined at 3.0 T in seven centers that performed the same preoperative MR imaging protocol, including DCE and DSC sequences. Two independent readers identified the perfusion hotspots on maps of volume transfer constant (Ktrans), plasma (vp) and extravascular-extracellular space (ve) volumes, initial area under the concentration curve, and relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV). Differences in parameters between grades and molecular subtypes were assessed by using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results The whole protocol was tolerated in all patients. Perfusion maps were successfully obtained in 94 patients. An excellent interreader reproducibility of DSC- and DCE-derived measures was found. Among DCE-derived parameters, vp and ve had the highest accuracy (are under the receiver operating characteristic curve [Az] = 0.847 and 0.853) for glioma grading. DSC-derived rCBV had the highest accuracy (Az = 0.894), but the difference was not statistically significant (P > .05). Among lower-grade gliomas, a moderate increase in both vp and rCBV was evident in isocitrate dehydrogenase wild-type tumors, although this was not significant (P > .05). Conclusion A standardized multicenter acquisition and analysis protocol of DCE and DSC MR imaging is feasible and highly reproducible. Both techniques showed a comparable, high diagnostic accuracy for grading gliomas. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

[1]  Gian Marco Conte,et al.  Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI in the study of brain gliomas: a comparison of data obtained using different commercial software , 2017, La radiologia medica.

[2]  R. Thornhill,et al.  Correlation of Tumor Immunohistochemistry with Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced and DSC-MRI Parameters in Patients with Gliomas , 2016, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[3]  C. Zimmer,et al.  Multiparametric MRI-based differentiation of WHO grade II/III glioma and WHO grade IV glioblastoma , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[4]  Martin Sill,et al.  Radiogenomics of Glioblastoma: Machine Learning-based Classification of Molecular Characteristics by Using Multiparametric and Multiregional MR Imaging Features. , 2016, Radiology.

[5]  A. Falini,et al.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging for glioma grading: Preliminary comparison of vessel compartment and permeability parameters using hotspot and histogram analysis. , 2016, European journal of radiology.

[6]  G. Reifenberger,et al.  The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary , 2016, Acta Neuropathologica.

[7]  S. J. Mills,et al.  Mitotic Activity in Glioblastoma Correlates with Estimated Extravascular Extracellular Space Derived from Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging , 2016, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[8]  G. Liberman,et al.  Differentiation between treatment-related changes and progressive disease in patients with high grade brain tumors using support vector machine classification based on DCE MRI , 2016, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[9]  Zachary S. Kelm,et al.  Impact of Software Modeling on the Accuracy of Perfusion MRI in Glioma , 2015, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[10]  R. Thornhill,et al.  Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of DSC- and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in the Preoperative Grading of Astrocytomas , 2015, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[11]  Kyung K. Peck,et al.  Dynamic contrast enhanced T1 MRI perfusion differentiates pseudoprogression from recurrent glioblastoma , 2015, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[12]  M Wintermark,et al.  ASFNR Recommendations for Clinical Performance of MR Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion Imaging of the Brain , 2015, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[13]  À. Rovira,et al.  Pixel-by-Pixel Comparison of Volume Transfer Constant and Estimates of Cerebral Blood Volume from Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced and Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging in High-Grade Gliomas , 2015, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[14]  Zachary S. Kelm,et al.  Variability and accuracy of different software packages for dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing glioblastoma progression from pseudoprogression , 2015, Journal of medical imaging.

[15]  Sumei Wang,et al.  Glioma grading by microvascular permeability parameters derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and intratumoral susceptibility signal on susceptibility weighted imaging , 2015, Cancer Imaging.

[16]  M. Essig,et al.  Principles of T2*‐weighted dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI technique in brain tumor imaging , 2015, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[17]  M. V. Valdés Hernández,et al.  Assessment of blood–brain barrier disruption using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. A systematic review , 2014, NeuroImage: Clinical.

[18]  Egill Rostrup,et al.  Discrimination between glioma grades II and III in suspected low-grade gliomas using dynamic contrast-enhanced and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging: a histogram analysis approach , 2014, Neuroradiology.

[19]  A. Bjørnerud,et al.  Sampling requirements in DCE‐MRI based analysis of high grade gliomas: Simulations and clinical results , 2013, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[20]  H. Larsson,et al.  Evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MRI in the differentiation of tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis , 2013, Neuroradiology.

[21]  Max Wintermark,et al.  Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked clinical questions. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[22]  Douglas C. Miller,et al.  Gliomas: predicting time to progression or survival with cerebral blood volume measurements at dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. , 2008, Radiology.

[23]  R M Weisskoff,et al.  Relative cerebral blood volume maps corrected for contrast agent extravasation significantly correlate with glioma tumor grade, whereas uncorrected maps do not. , 2006, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[24]  M. Bastin,et al.  Effects of dexamethasone on cerebral perfusion and water diffusion in patients with high-grade glioma. , 2006, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[25]  Geoff J M Parker,et al.  Is volume transfer coefficient (K(trans)) related to histologic grade in human gliomas? , 2005, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[26]  Glyn Johnson,et al.  Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. , 2003, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[27]  B. Rosen,et al.  Early changes measured by magnetic resonance imaging in cerebral blood flow, blood volume, and blood-brain barrier permeability following dexamethasone treatment in patients with brain tumors. , 1999, Journal of neurosurgery.

[28]  E P Frenkel,et al.  Effects of adrenal cortical steroids and osmotic blood-brain barrier opening on methotrexate delivery to gliomas in the rodent: the factor of the blood-brain barrier. , 1982, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Diana Delgado,et al.  MR perfusion-weighted imaging in the evaluation of high-grade gliomas after treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2017, Neuro-oncology.

[30]  S. Heiland,et al.  Evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI derived microvascular permeability in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab , 2014, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[31]  Dafna Ben Bashat,et al.  Classification of tumor area using combined DCE and DSC MRI in patients with glioblastoma , 2014, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.