Prognostic Predictions for Patients with Glioblastoma after Standard Treatment: Application of Contrast Leakage Information from DSC-MRI within Nonenhancing FLAIR High-Signal-Intensity Lesions

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Weis SM,
   2. Cheresh DA.

   Pathophysiological consequences of VEGF-induced vascular permeability. Nature 2005;437:497 doi:10.1038/nature03987 pmid:16177780

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Bao S,
   2. Wu Q,
   3. Sathornsumetee S, et al

   . Stem cell–like glioma cells promote tumor angiogenesis through vascular endothelial growth factor. Cancer Res 2006;66:7843–48 doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1010 pmid:16912155

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Rees J.

   Advances in magnetic resonance imaging of brain tumours. Curr Opin Neurol 2003;16:643–50 doi:10.1097/00019052-200312000-00001 pmid:14624071

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Stupp R,
   2. Mason WP,
   3. Van Den Bent MJ, et al

   . Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005;352:987–96 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043330 pmid:15758009

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Stupp R,
   2. Hegi ME,
   3. Mason WP, et al

   . Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised Phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:459–66 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70025-7 pmid:19269895

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Albert FK,
   2. Forsting M,
   3. Sartor K, et al

   . Early postoperative magnetic resonance imaging after resection of malignant glioma: objective evaluation of residual tumor and its influence on regrowth and prognosis. Neurosurgery 1994;34:45–61 doi:10.1097/00006123-199401000-00008 pmid:8121569

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Lacroix M,
   2. Abi-Said D,
   3. Fourney DR, et al

   . A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survival. J Neurosurg 2001;95:190–98 doi:10.3171/jns.2001.95.2.0190 pmid:11780887

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Kim R,
   2. Choi SH,
   3. Yun TJ, et al

   . Prognosis prediction of non-enhancing T2 high signal intensity lesions in patients with glioblastoma after standard treatment: application of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2017;27:1176–85 doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4464-6 pmid:27357131

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Jung SC,
   2. Yeom J,
   3. Kim J-H, et al

   . Glioma: application of histogram analysis of pharmacokinetic parameters from T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to tumor grading. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1103–10 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3825 pmid:24384119

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    1. Cao Y,
    2. Nagesh V,
    3. Hamstra D, et al

    . The extent and severity of vascular leakage as evidence of tumor aggressiveness in high-grade gliomas. Cancer Res 2006;66:8912–17 doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-4328 pmid:16951209

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Jia Z,
    2. Geng D,
    3. Xie T, et al

    . Quantitative analysis of neovascular permeability in glioma by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. J Clin Neurosci 2012;19:820–23 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2011.08.030 pmid:22381582

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Jain R.

    Measurements of tumor vascular leakiness using DCE in brain tumors: clinical applications. NMR Biomed 2013;26:1042–49 doi:10.1002/nbm.2994 pmid:23832526

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Bjornerud A,
    2. Sorensen AG,
    3. Mouridsen K, et al

    . T1-and T*2-dominant extravasation correction in DSC-MRI, Part I: theoretical considerations and implications for assessment of tumor hemodynamic properties. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011;31:2041–53 doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2011.52 pmid:21505483

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Wen PY,
    2. Macdonald DR,
    3. Reardon DA, et al

    . Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1963–72 doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3541 pmid:20231676

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Tofts PS,
    2. Kermode AG.

    Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging, 1: fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med 1991;17:357–67 doi:10.1002/mrm.1910170208 pmid:2062210

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Haacke EM,
    2. Filleti CL,
    3. Gattu R, et al

    . New algorithm for quantifying vascular changes in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI independent of absolute T1 values. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:463–72 doi:10.1002/mrm.21358 pmid:17763352

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Emblem KE,
    2. Bjornerud A,
    3. Mouridsen K, et al

    . T(1)- and T(2)(*)-dominant extravasation correction in DSC-MRI, Part II: predicting patient outcome after a single dose of cediranib in recurrent patients with glioblastoma. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011;31:2054–64 doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2011.39 pmid:21505476

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Boxerman J,
    2. Schmainda K,
    3. Weisskoff R.

    Relative cerebral blood volume maps corrected for contrast agent extravasation significantly correlate with glioma tumor grade, whereas uncorrected maps do not. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:859–67 pmid:16611779

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Østergaard L,
    2. Weisskoff RM,
    3. Chesler DA, et al

    . High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravascular tracer bolus passages, Part I: mathematical approach and statistical analysis. Magn Reson Med 1996;36:715–25 doi:10.1002/mrm.1910360510 pmid:8916022

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Sourbron S,
    2. Ingrisch M,
    3. Siefert A, et al

    . Quantification of cerebral blood flow, cerebral blood volume, and blood–brain-barrier leakage with DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009;62:205–17 doi:10.1002/mrm.22005 pmid:19449435

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Skinner JT,
    2. Moots PL,
    3. Ayers GD, et al

    . On the use of DSC-MRI for measuring vascular permeability. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:80–87 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4478 pmid:26427833

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Pluim JP,
    2. Maintz JA,
    3. Viergever MA.

    Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003;22:986–1004 doi:10.1109/TMI.2003.815867 pmid:12906253

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Ayacge N.

    1. Sundar H,
    2. Shen D,
    3. Biros G, et al

    . Robust computation of mutual information using spatially adaptive meshes. In: Ayacge N. International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2007:950–58
24. 24.↵
    1. Jain R,
    2. Griffith B,
    3. Alotaibi F, et al

    . Glioma angiogenesis and perfusion imaging: understanding the relationship between tumor blood volume and leakiness with increasing glioma grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:2030–35 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4405 pmid:26206809

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Heye AK,
    2. Culling RD,
    3. Valdés Hernández MC, et al

    . Assessment of blood–brain barrier disruption using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a systematic review. Neuroimage: Clinical 2014;6:262–74 doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2014.09.002 pmid:25379439

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Law M,
    2. Yang S,
    3. Babb JS, et al

    . Comparison of cerebral blood volume and vascular permeability from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with glioma grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:746–75 pmid:15140713

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
27. 27.↵
    1. Lüdemann L,
    2. Grieger W,
    3. Wurm R, et al

    . Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with WHO tumor grading for gliomas. Eur Radiol 2001;11:1231–41 doi:10.1007/s003300000748 pmid:11471617

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Law M,
    2. Yang S,
    3. Wang H, et al

    . Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:1989–98 pmid:14625221

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    1. Aronen HJ,
    2. Gazit IE,
    3. Louis DN, et al

    . Cerebral blood volume maps of gliomas: comparison with tumor grade and histologic findings. Radiology 1994;191:41–51 doi:10.1148/radiology.191.1.8134596 pmid:8134596

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    1. Sugahara T,
    2. Korogi Y,
    3. Kochi M, et al

    . Correlation of MR imaging-determined cerebral blood volume maps with histologic and angiographic determination of vascularity of gliomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:1479–86 doi:10.2214/ajr.171.6.9843274 pmid:9843274

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    1. Juillerat-Jeanneret L.

    The targeted delivery of cancer drugs across the blood–brain barrier: chemical modifications of drugs or drug-nanoparticles? Drug Discov Today 2008;13:1099–1106 doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2008.09.005 pmid:18848640

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Deeken JF,
    2. Löscher W.

    The blood-brain barrier and cancer: transporters, treatment, and Trojan horses. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:1663–74 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2854 pmid:17363519

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Régina A,
    2. Demeule M,
    3. Laplante A, et al

    . Multidrug resistance in brain tumors: roles of the blood–brain barrier. Canc Cancer Metastasis Rev 2001;20:13–25 doi:10.1023/A:1013104423154 pmid:11831641

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Muldoon LL,
    2. Soussain C,
    3. Jahnke K, et al

    . Chemotherapy delivery issues in central nervous system malignancy: a reality check. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:2295–2305 doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.09.9861 pmid:17538176

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    1. Park HJ,
    2. Griffin RJ,
    3. Hui S, et al

    . Radiation-induced vascular damage in tumors: implications of vascular damage in ablative hypofractionated radiotherapy (SBRT and SRS). Radiat Red 2012;177:311–27 doi:10.1667/RR2773.1 pmid:22229487

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Pegg AE.

    Repair of O6-alkylguanine by alkyltransferases. Mutat Res 2000;462:83–100 doi:10.1016/S1383-5742(00)00017-X pmid:10767620

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    1. Ludlum DB.

    DNA alkylation by the haloethylnitrosoureas: nature of modifications produced and their enzymatic repair or removal. Mutat Res 1990;233:117–26 doi:10.1016/0027-5107(90)90156-X pmid:2233793

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. 38.↵
    1. Hegi ME,
    2. Diserens A-C,
    3. Gorlia T, et al

    . MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005;352:997–1003 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043331 pmid:15758010

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
39. 39.↵
    1. Hartmann C,
    2. Meyer J,
    3. Balss J, et al

    . Type and frequency of IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are related to astrocytic and oligodendroglial differentiation and age: a study of 1,010 diffuse gliomas. Acta Neuropathol 2009;118:469–74 doi:10.1007/s00401-009-0561-9 pmid:19554337

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
40. 40.↵
    1. Capper D,
    2. Weissert S,
    3. Balss J, et al

    . Characterization of R132H mutation-specific IDH1 antibody binding in brain tumors. Brain Pathol 2010;20:245–54 doi:10.1111/j.1750-3639.2009.00352.x pmid:19903171

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
41. 41.↵
    1. Verhoeff JJ,
    2. van Tellingen O,
    3. Claes A, et al

    . Concerns about anti-angiogenic treatment in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. BMC Cancer 2009;9:444 doi:10.1186/1471-2407-9-444 pmid:20015387

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Yang L,
    2. Krefting I,
    3. Gorovets A, et al

    . Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and class labeling of gadolinium-based contrast agents by the Food and Drug Administration. Radiology 2012;265:248–53 doi:10.1148/radiol.12112783 pmid:22923714

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. McDonald RJ,
    2. McDonald JS,
    3. Dai D, et al

    . Comparison of gadolinium concentrations within multiple rat organs after intravenous administration of linear versus macrocyclic gadolinium chelates. Radiology 2017;285:536–45 doi:10.1148/radiol.2017161594 pmid:28640692

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. McGehee BE,
    2. Pollock JM,
    3. Maldjian JA.

    Brain perfusion imaging: how does it work and what should I use? J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:1257–72 doi:10.1002/jmri.23645 pmid:23165731

    CrossRefPubMed