Intergrating conventional MRI, texture analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and susceptibility weighted imaging for glioma grading

Background The application of conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in glioma grading is limited and non-specific. Purpose To investigate the application values of MRI, texture analysis (TA) of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and intratumoral susceptibility signal (ITSS) on susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI), alone and in combination, for glioma grading. Material and Methods Fifty-two patients with pathologically confirmed gliomas who underwent DCE-MRI and SWI were enrolled in this retrospective study. Conventional MRIs were evaluated by the VASARI scoring system. TA of DCE-MRI-derived parameters and the degree of ITSS were compared between low-grade gliomas (LGGs) and high-grade gliomas (HGGs). The diagnostic ability of each parameter and their combination for glioma grading were analyzed. Results Significant statistical differences in VASARI features were observed between LGGs and HGGs (P < 0.05), of which the enhancement quality had the highest area under the curve (AUC) (0.873) with 93.3% sensitivity and 80% specificity. The TA of DCE-MRI derived parameters were significantly different between LGGs and HGGs (P < 0.05), of which the uniformity of Ktrans had the highest AUC (0.917) with 93.3% sensitivity and 90% specificity. The degree of ITSS was significantly different between LGGs and HGGs (P < 0.001). The AUC of the ITSS was 0.925 with 93.3% sensitivity and 90% specificity. The best discriminative power was obtained from a combination of enhancement quality, Ktrans- uniformity, and ITSS, resulting in 96.7% sensitivity, 100.0% specificity, and AUC of 0.993. Conclusion Combining conventional MRI, TA of DCE-MRI, and ITSS on SWI may help to improve the differentiation between LGGs and HGGs.

[1]  E. Liouta,et al.  Prognostic value of preoperative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI perfusion parameters for high-grade glioma patients , 2016, Neuroradiology.

[2]  K. Peck,et al.  Dynamic Contrast‐Enhanced MRI in Low‐Grade Versus Anaplastic Oligodendrogliomas , 2016, Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging.

[3]  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.

[4]  Seong Ho Park,et al.  Glioma: Application of Histogram Analysis of Pharmacokinetic Parameters from T1-Weighted Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging to Tumor Grading , 2014, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[5]  A. Waldman,et al.  Conventional MRI evaluation of gliomas. , 2011, The British journal of radiology.

[6]  S. Heiland,et al.  Differentiation of glioblastoma and primary CNS lymphomas using susceptibility weighted imaging. , 2013, European journal of radiology.

[7]  Bin Ai,et al.  Susceptibility-weighted imaging in grading brain astrocytomas. , 2010, European journal of radiology.

[8]  G. Jahng,et al.  Semiquantitative Assessment of Intratumoral Susceptibility Signals Using Non-Contrast-Enhanced High-Field High-Resolution Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging in Patients with Gliomas: Comparison with MR Perfusion Imaging , 2009, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[9]  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.

[10]  L. Mazzoni,et al.  Prognostic Value of MR Imaging Texture Analysis in Brain Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Oligo-Metastases Undergoing Stereotactic Irradiation , 2016, Cureus.

[11]  Shi Haibin,et al.  Clinical applications of susceptibility-weighted imaging in detecting and grading intracranial gliomas: a review , 2013, Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society.

[12]  Sabine Van Huffel,et al.  Integrating diffusion kurtosis imaging, dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI, and short echo time chemical shift imaging for grading gliomas. , 2014, Neuro-oncology.

[13]  Naoki Kagawa,et al.  Introduction of High Throughput Magnetic Resonance T2-Weighted Image Texture Analysis for WHO Grade 2 and 3 Gliomas , 2016, PloS one.

[14]  E. Haacke,et al.  Susceptibility‐Weighted Imaging of Glioma: Update on Current Imaging Status and Future Directions , 2016, Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging.

[15]  William D. Dunn,et al.  MR imaging predictors of molecular profile and survival: multi-institutional study of the TCGA glioblastoma data set. , 2013, Radiology.

[16]  Kyung K Peck,et al.  Dynamic Contrast‐Enhanced Perfusion MRI and Diffusion‐Weighted Imaging in Grading of Gliomas , 2015, Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging.

[17]  Sang Joon Park,et al.  Glioma: Application of Whole-Tumor Texture Analysis of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging for the Evaluation of Tumor Heterogeneity , 2014, PloS one.

[18]  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.

[19]  Zhiyun Yang,et al.  Quantitative Evaluation of Diffusion and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR in Tumor Parenchyma and Peritumoral Area for Distinction of Brain Tumors , 2015, PloS one.

[20]  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.

[21]  Teresa Wu,et al.  Multi-Parametric MRI and Texture Analysis to Visualize Spatial Histologic Heterogeneity and Tumor Extent in Glioblastoma , 2015, PloS one.

[22]  Bal Sanghera,et al.  Assessment of tumor heterogeneity: an emerging imaging tool for clinical practice? , 2012, Insights into Imaging.

[23]  Massimo Caulo,et al.  Data-driven grading of brain gliomas: a multiparametric MR imaging study. , 2014, Radiology.

[24]  Michael J Paldino,et al.  Fundamentals of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. , 2009, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.

[25]  Peng Cao,et al.  Textural features of dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI derived model‐free and model‐based parameter maps in glioma grading , 2018, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[26]  Balaji Ganeshan,et al.  Diagnostic performance of texture analysis on MRI in grading cerebral gliomas. , 2016, European journal of radiology.

[27]  Mauricio Reyes,et al.  Fully automatic GBM segmentation in the TCGA-GBM dataset: Prognosis and correlation with VASARI features , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[28]  Rajikha Raja,et al.  Assessment of tissue heterogeneity using diffusion tensor and diffusion kurtosis imaging for grading gliomas , 2016, Neuroradiology.

[29]  Olivier Gevaert,et al.  Addition of MR imaging features and genetic biomarkers strengthens glioblastoma survival prediction in TCGA patients. , 2015, Journal of neuroradiology. Journal de neuroradiologie.

[30]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Textural Features for Image Classification , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..