Imaging-Based Algorithm for the Local Grading of Glioma

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Louis DN,
   2. Perry A,
   3. Reifenberger G, et al

   . The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016;131:803–20 doi:10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1 pmid:27157931

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

   ; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. 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
3. 3.↵
   1. Okamoto Y,
   2. Di Patre PL,
   3. Burkhard C, et al

   . Population-based study on incidence, survival rates, and genetic alterations of low-grade diffuse astrocytomas and oligodendrogliomas. Acta Neuropathol 2004;108:49–56 doi:10.1007/s00401-004-0861-z pmid:15118874

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Ohgaki H,
   2. Kleihues P

   . Epidemiology and etiology of gliomas. Acta Neuropathol 2005;109:93–108 doi:10.1007/s00401-005-0991-y pmid:15685439

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Parker NR,
   2. Khong P,
   3. Parkinson JF, et al

   . Molecular heterogeneity in glioblastoma: potential clinical implications. Front Oncol 2015;5:55 doi:10.3389/fonc.2015.00055 pmid:25785247

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Aum DJ,
   2. Kim DH,
   3. Beaumont TL, et al

   . Molecular and cellular heterogeneity: the hallmark of glioblastoma. Neurosurg Focus 2014;37:E11 doi:10.3171/2014.9.FOCUS14521 pmid:25434380

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Jackson RJ,
   2. Fuller GN,
   3. Abi-Said D, et al

   . Limitations of stereotactic biopsy in the initial management of gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2001;3:193–200 doi:10.1093/neuonc/3.3.193 pmid:11465400

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Gates EDH,
   2. Lin JS,
   3. Weinberg JS, et al

   . Guiding the first biopsy in glioma patients using estimated Ki67 maps derived from magnetic resonance imaging: conventional versus advanced imaging. Neuro Oncol 2019;21:527–36 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noz004

   CrossRef
9. 9.↵
   1. Ringel F,
   2. Ingerl D,
   3. Ott S, et al

   . VarioGuide: a new frameless image‐guided stereotactic system: accuracy study and clinical assessment. Oper Neurosurg 2009;64:(5 Suppl 2):365–71 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000341532.15867.1C pmid:19404116

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Avants BB,
    2. Tustison NJ,
    3. Song G, et al

    . A reproducible evaluation of ANTs similarity metric performance in brain image registration. Neuroimage 2011;54:2033–44 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.09.025 pmid:20851191

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Leung KK,
    2. Clarkson MJ,
    3. Bartlett JW, et al; ; Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

    . Robust atrophy rate measurement in Alzheimer’s disease using multi-site serial MRI: tissue-specific intensity normalization and parameter selection. Neuroimage 2010;50:516–23 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.059 pmid:20034579

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2019 https://www.R-project.org/
13. 13.↵
    1. Breiman L

    . Random forests. Mach Learn 2001;45:5–32 doi:10.1023/A:1010933404324

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Cohen J

    . A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960;20:37–46 doi:10.1177/001316446002000104

    CrossRefWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Pedeutour-Braccini Z,
    2. Burel-Vandenbos F,
    3. Gozé C, et al

    . Microfoci of malignant progression in diffuse low-grade gliomas: towards the creation of an intermediate grade in glioma classification? Virchows Arch 2015;466:433–44 doi:10.1007/s00428-014-1712-5 pmid:25861023

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Zhao M,
    2. Guo LL,
    3. Huang N, et al

    . Quantitative analysis of permeability for glioma grading using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Oncol Lett 2017;14:5418–26 doi:10.3892/ol.2017.6895 pmid:29113174

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Prah MA,
    2. Al-Gizawiy MM,
    3. Mueller WM, et al

    . Spatial discrimination of glioblastoma and treatment effect with histologically-validated perfusion and diffusion magnetic resonance imaging metrics. J Neurooncol 2018;136:13–21 doi:10.1007/s11060-017-2617-3 pmid:28900832

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Hu LS,
    2. Ning S,
    3. Eschbacher JM, et al

    . Multi-parametric MRI and texture analysis to visualize spatial histologic heterogeneity and tumor extent in glioblastoma. PLoS One 2015;10:e0141506 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0141506 pmid:26599106

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    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
20. 20.↵
    1. Akbari H,
    2. Macyszyn L,
    3. Da X, et al

    . Imaging surrogates of infiltration obtained via multiparametric imaging pattern analysis predict subsequent location of recurrence of glioblastoma. Neurosurg 2016;78:572–80 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001202 pmid:26813856

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Miloushev VZ,
    2. Chow DS,
    3. Filippi CG

    . Meta-analysis of diffusion metrics for the prediction of tumor grade in gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:302–08 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4097 pmid:25190201

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Jakab A,
    2. Molnár P,
    3. Emri M, et al

    . Glioma grade assessment by using histogram analysis of diffusion tensor imaging-derived maps. Neuroradiology 2011;53:483–91 doi:10.1007/s00234-010-0769-3 pmid:20857285

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Barajas RF Jr,
    2. Hodgson JG,
    3. Chang JS, et al

    . Glioblastoma multiforme regional genetic and cellular expression patterns: influence on anatomic and physiologic MR imaging. Radiology 2010;254:564–76 doi:10.1148/radiol.09090663 pmid:20093527

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Zhang X,
    2. Yan LF,
    3. Hu YC, et al

    . Optimizing a machine learning based glioma grading system using multi-parametric MRI histogram and texture features. Oncotarget 2017;8:47816–30 doi:10.18632/oncotarget.18001 pmid:28599282

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Chang K,
    2. Bai HX,
    3. Zhou H, et al

    . Residual convolutional neural network for the determination of IDH status in low- and high-grade gliomas from MR imaging. Clin Cancer Res 2018;24:1073–81 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-2236 pmid:29167275

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
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;25:746–55 pmid:15140713

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
27. 27.↵
    1. Sugahara T,
    2. Korogi Y,
    3. Kochi M, et al

    . Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;9:53–60 doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199901)9:1<53::AID-JMRI7>3.0.CO;2-2 pmid:10030650

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    1. Lee S,
    2. Choi SH,
    3. Ryoo I, et al

    . Evaluation of the microenvironmental heterogeneity in high-grade gliomas with IDH1/2 gene mutation using histogram analysis of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic-susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging. J Neurooncol 2015;121:141–50 doi:10.1007/s11060-014-1614-z pmid:25205290

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Yan H,
    2. Parsons DW,
    3. Jin G, et al

    . IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas. N Engl J Med 2009;360:765–73 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0808710 pmid:19228619

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    1. Noguchi T,
    2. Yoshiura T,
    3. Hiwatashi A, et al

    . Perfusion imaging of brain tumors using arterial spin-labeling: correlation with histopathologic vascular density. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:688–93 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0903 pmid:18184842

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    1. Hartmann C,
    2. Hentschel B,
    3. Wick W, et al

    . Patients with IDH1 wild type anaplastic astrocytomas exhibit worse prognosis than IDH1-mutated glioblastomas, and IDH1 mutation status accounts for the unfavorable prognostic effect of higher age: implications for classification of gliomas. Acta Neuropathol 2010;120:707–18 doi:10.1007/s00401-010-0781-z pmid:21088844

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    1. Shah V,
    2. Turkbey B,
    3. Mani H, et al

    . Decision support system for localizing prostate cancer based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 2012;39:4093–103 doi:10.1118/1.4722753 pmid:22830742

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Durst CR,
    2. Raghavan P,
    3. Shaffrey ME, et al

    . Multimodal MR imaging model to predict tumor infiltration in patients with gliomas. Neuroradiology 2014;56:107–15 doi:10.1007/s00234-013-1308-9 pmid:24337609

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Lemee JM,
    2. Clavreul A,
    3. Menei P

    . Intratumoral heterogeneity in glioblastoma: don’t forget the peritumoral brain zone. Neuro Oncol 2015;17:1322–32 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov119 pmid:26203067

    CrossRefPubMed