Mitotic Activity in Glioblastoma Correlates with Estimated Extravascular Extracellular Space Derived from Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Louis DN,
   3. Ohgaki H,
   4. Wiestler OD, et al

   . The 2007 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System. Acta Neuropathol 2007;114:97–109 pmid:17618441

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Struikmans H,
   3. Rutgers DH,
   4. Jansen GH, et al

   . Prognostic relevance of MIB-1 immunoreactivity, S-phase fraction, 5-bromo-2′-deoxyuridine labeling indices, and mitotic figures in gliomas. Radiat Oncol Investig 1999;7:243–48 pmid:10492165

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Korshunov A,
   3. Golanov A,
   4. Sycheva R

   . Immunohistochemical markers for prognosis of anaplastic astrocytomas. J Neurooncol 2002;58:203–15 doi:10.1023/A:1016261900413 pmid:12187956

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Scott JN,
   3. Rewcastle NB,
   4. Brasher PM, et al

   . Which glioblastoma multiforme patient will become a long-term survivor? A population-based study. Ann Neurol 1999;46:183–88 pmid:10443883

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Abdulrauf SI,
   3. Edvardsen K,
   4. Ho KL, et al

   . Vascular endothelial growth factor expression and vascular density as prognostic markers of survival in patients with low-grade astrocytoma. J Neurosurg 1998;88:513–20 doi:10.3171/jns.1998.88.3.0513 pmid:9488306

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   2. Yao Y,
   3. Kubota T,
   4. Takeuchi H, et al

   . Prognostic significance of microvessel density determined by an anti-CD105/endoglin monoclonal antibody in astrocytic tumors: comparison with an anti-CD31 monoclonal antibody. Neuropathology 2005;25:201–06 doi:10.1111/j.1440-1789.2005.00632.x pmid:16193836

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   2. Preusser M,
   3. Gelpi E,
   4. Matej R, et al

   . No prognostic impact of survivin expression in glioblastoma. Acta Neuropathol 2005;109:534–38 doi:10.1007/s00401-005-0992-x pmid:15843906

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Birner P,
   3. Piribauer M,
   4. Fischer I, et al

   . Vascular patterns in glioblastoma influence clinical outcome and associate with variable expression of angiogenic proteins: evidence for distinct angiogenic subtypes. Brain Pathol 2003;13:133–43 pmid:12744467

   PubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   2. Colman H,
   3. Giannini C,
   4. Huang L, et al

   . Assessment and prognostic significance of mitotic index using the mitosis marker phospho-histone H3 in low and intermediate-grade infiltrating astrocytomas. Am J Surg Pathol 2006;30:657–64 pmid:16699322

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    2. Coleman KE,
    3. Brat DJ,
    4. Cotsonis GA, et al

    . Proliferation (MIB-1 expression) in oligodendrogliomas: assessment of quantitative methods and prognostic significance. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2006;14:109–14 doi:10.1097/01.pai.0000144557.31747.b9 pmid:16540741

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Flynn JR,
    3. Wang L,
    4. Gillespie DL, et al

    . Hypoxia-regulated protein expression, patient characteristics, and preoperative imaging as predictors of survival in adults with glioblastoma multiforme. Cancer 2008;113:1032–42 doi:10.1002/cncr.23678 pmid:18618497

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    2. Karayan-Tapon L,
    3. Wager M,
    4. Guilhot J, et al

    . Semaphorin, neuropilin and VEGF expression in glial tumours: SEMA3G, a prognostic marker? Br J Cancer 2008;99:1153–60 doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6604641 pmid:18781179

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Nam DH,
    3. Park K,
    4. Suh YL, et al

    . Expression of VEGF and brain specific angiogenesis inhibitor-1 in glioblastoma: prognostic significance. Oncol Rep 2004;11:863–69 pmid:15010886

    PubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    2. Oehring RD,
    3. Miletic M,
    4. Valter MM, et al

    . Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in astrocytic gliomas–a prognostic factor? J Neurooncol 1999;45:117–25 doi:10.1023/A:1006333005563 pmid:10778727

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Tofts PS

    . Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:91–101 doi:10.1002/jmri.1880070113 pmid:9039598

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    2. Law M,
    3. Yang S,
    4. 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
17. 17.↵
    2. Patankar TF,
    3. Haroon HA,
    4. Mills SJ, et al

    . Is volume transfer coefficient (K(trans)) related to histologic grade in human gliomas? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:2455–65 pmid:16286385

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    2. Sugahara T,
    3. Korogi Y,
    4. 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
19. 19.↵
    2. Roberts HC,
    3. Roberts TP,
    4. Brasch RC, et al

    . Quantitative measurement of microvascular permeability in human brain tumors achieved using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: correlation with histologic grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:891–99 pmid:10815665

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    2. Roberts HC,
    3. Roberts TP,
    4. Bollen AW, et al

    . Correlation of microvascular permeability derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with histologic grade and tumor labeling index: a study in human brain tumors. Acad Radiol 2001;8:384–91 doi:10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80545-7 pmid:11345268

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Law M,
    3. Young R,
    4. Babb J, et al

    . Comparing perfusion metrics obtained from a single compartment versus pharmacokinetic modeling methods using dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with glioma grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:1975–82 pmid:17032878

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Lev MH,
    3. Ozsunar Y,
    4. Henson JW, et al

    . Glial tumor grading and outcome prediction using dynamic spin-echo MR susceptibility mapping compared with conventional contrast-enhanced MR: confounding effect of elevated rCBV of oligodendrogliomas [corrected]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:214–21 pmid:14970020

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Law M,
    3. Young RJ,
    4. Babb JS, et al

    . Gliomas: predicting time to progression or survival with cerebral blood volume measurements at dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2008;247:490–98 doi:10.1148/radiol.2472070898 pmid:18349315

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    2. Cao Y,
    3. Tsien CI,
    4. Nagesh V, et al

    . Survival prediction in high-grade gliomas by MRI perfusion before and during early stage of RT [corrected]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;64:876–85 doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.001 pmid:16298499

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    2. Mills SJ,
    3. Patankar TA,
    4. Haroon HA, et al

    . Do cerebral blood volume and contrast transfer coefficient predict prognosis in human glioma? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:853–58 pmid:16611778

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Cha S,
    3. Johnson G,
    4. Wadghiri YZ, et al

    . Dynamic, contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI in mouse gliomas: correlation with histopathology. Magn Reson Med 2003;49:848–55 doi:10.1002/mrm.10446 pmid:12704767

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    2. Haris M,
    3. Husain N,
    4. Singh A, et al

    . Dynamic contrast-enhanced derived cerebral blood volume correlates better with leak correction than with no correction for vascular endothelial growth factor, microvascular density, and grading of astrocytoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2008;32:955–65 doi:10.1097/RCT.0b013e31816200d1 pmid:19204461

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Liao W,
    3. Liu Y,
    4. Wang X, et al

    . Differentiation of primary central nervous system lymphoma and high-grade glioma with dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol 2009;50:217–25 doi:10.1080/02841850802616752 pmid:19096950

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    2. Sadeghi N,
    3. D'Haene N,
    4. Decaestecker C, et al

    . Apparent diffusion coefficient and cerebral blood volume in brain gliomas: relation to tumor cell density and tumor microvessel density based on stereotactic biopsies. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:476–82 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0851 pmid:18079184

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    2. Maia AC Jr.,
    3. Malheiros SM,
    4. da Rocha AJ, et al

    . MR cerebral blood volume maps correlated with vascular endothelial growth factor expression and tumor grade in nonenhancing gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:777–83 pmid:15814920

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    2. Sadeghi N,
    3. Salmon I,
    4. Decaestecker C, et al

    . Stereotactic comparison among cerebral blood volume, methionine uptake, and histopathology in brain glioma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:455–61 pmid:17353312

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    2. Callot V,
    3. Galanaud D,
    4. Figarella-Branger D, et al

    . Correlations between MR and endothelial hyperplasia in low-grade gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;26:52–60 doi:10.1002/jmri.20995 pmid:17659539

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    2. Jia ZZ,
    3. Gu HM,
    4. Zhou XJ, et al

    . The assessment of immature microvascular density in brain gliomas with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2015;84:1805–09 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.05.035 pmid:26066470

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. Li X,
    3. Zhu Y,
    4. Kang H, et al

    . Glioma grading by microvascular permeability parameters derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and intratumoral susceptibility signal on susceptibility weighted imaging. Cancer Imaging 2015;15:4 doi:10.1186/s40644-015-0039-z pmid:25889239

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    2. Mills SJ,
    3. Soh C,
    4. Rose CJ, et al

    . Candidate biomarkers of extravascular extracellular space: a direct comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging–derived measurement of the volume of the extravascular extracellular space in glioblastoma multiforme. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:549–53 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1844 pmid:19850765

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
36. 36.↵
    2. Aryal MP,
    3. Nagaraja TN,
    4. Keenan KA, et al

    . Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI parameters and tumor cellularity in a rat model of cerebral glioma at 7 T. Magn Reson Med 2014;71:2206–14 doi:10.1002/mrm.24873 pmid:23878070

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    2. Bastin ME,
    3. Carpenter TK,
    4. Armitage PA, et al

    . Effects of dexamethasone on cerebral perfusion and water diffusion in patients with high-grade glioma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:402–08 pmid:16484419

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    2. Thompson G,
    3. Cain J,
    4. Jackson A, et al

    . Interobserver agreement for cerebral glioma volumetrics on conventional MR imaging. In: Proceedings of the 16th Scientific Meeting and Exhibition of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. May 3–9, 2008
39. 39.↵
    2. Parker GJ,
    3. Jackson A,
    4. Waterton JC

    . Automated arterial input function extraction for T1-weighted DCE-MRI. In: Proceedings of the 11th Scientific Meeting and Exhibition of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. July 10–16, 2003
40. 40.↵
    2. Mills SJ,
    3. Soh C,
    4. O'Connor JP, et al

    . Tumour enhancing fraction (EnF) in glioma: relationship to tumour grade. Eur Radiol 2009;19:1489–98 doi:10.1007/s00330-008-1288-z pmid:19198847

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    2. O'Connor JP,
    3. Jackson A,
    4. Parker GJM, et al

    . DCE-MRI biomarkers in the clinical evaluation of antiangiogenic and vascular disrupting agents. Br J Cancer 2007;96:189–95 doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603515 pmid:17211479

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
42. 42.↵
    2. Lüdemann L,
    3. Grieger W,
    4. Wurm R, et al

    . Quantitative measurement of leakage volume and permeability in gliomas, meningiomas and brain metastases with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2005;23:833–41 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2005.06.007 pmid:16275421

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    2. Zhu XP,
    3. Li KL,
    4. Kamaly-Asl ID, et al

    . Quantification of endothelial permeability, leakage space, and blood volume in brain tumors using combined T1 and T2* contrast-enhanced dynamic MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;11:575–85 pmid:10862055

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
44. 44.↵
    2. Lüdemann L,
    3. Grieger W,
    4. 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
45. 45.↵
    2. Andersen C,
    3. Jensen FT

    . Differences in blood-tumour-barrier leakage of human intracranial tumours: quantitative monitoring of vasogenic oedema and its response to glucocorticoid treatment. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1998;140:919–24 doi:10.1007/s007010050194 pmid:9842429

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    2. Armitage PA,
    3. Schwindack C,
    4. Bastin ME, et al

    . Quantitative assessment of intracranial tumor response to dexamethasone using diffusion, perfusion and permeability magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:303–10 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2006.09.002 pmid:17371718

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
47. 47.↵
    2. Fluckiger JU,
    3. Loveless ME,
    4. Barnes SL, et al

    . A diffusion-compensated model for the analysis of DCE-MRI data: theory, simulations and experimental results. Phys Med Biol 2013;58:1983–98 doi:10.1088/0031-9155/58/6/1983 pmid:23458745

    CrossRefPubMed
48. 48.↵
    2. Lüdemann L,
    3. Hamm B,
    4. Zimmer C

    . Pharmacokinetic analysis of glioma compartments with dynamic Gd-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2000;18:1201–14 doi:10.1016/S0730-725X(00)00223-X pmid:11167040

    CrossRefPubMed
49. 49.↵
    2. Cheng HL

    . Investigation and optimization of parameter accuracy in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;28:736–43 doi:10.1002/jmri.21489 pmid:18777534

    CrossRefPubMed
50. 50.↵
    2. McClatchey AI,
    3. Yap AS

    . Contact inhibition (of proliferation) redux. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2012;24:685–94 doi:10.1016/j.ceb.2012.06.009 pmid:22835462

    CrossRefPubMed
51. 51.↵
    2. Tumanishvili GD,
    3. Salamatina NV

    . Action of nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions of liver homogenate on liver growth in the chick embryo. J Embryol Exp Morphol 1968;20:53–71 pmid:5693889

    PubMed
52. 52.↵
    2. Mayor R,
    3. Carmona-Fontaine C

    . Keeping in touch with contact inhibition of locomotion. Trends Cell Biol 2010;20:319–28 doi:10.1016/j.tcb.2010.03.005 pmid:20399659

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
53. 53.↵
    2. Lüdemann L,
    3. Warmuth C,
    4. Plotkin M, et al

    . Brain tumor perfusion: comparison of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using T1, T2, and T2* contrast, pulsed arterial spin labeling, and H2(15)O positron emission tomography. Eur J Radiol 2009;70:465–74 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.012 pmid:18359598

    CrossRefPubMed