Regional and Volumetric Parameters for Diffusion-Weighted WHO Grade II and III Glioma Genotyping: A Method Comparison

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Brat DJ,
   2. Verhaak RG,
   3. Aldape KD, et al

   ; Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive, integrative genomic analysis of diffuse lower-grade gliomas. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2481–98 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1402121 pmid:26061751

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   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
3. 3.↵
   1. Stichel D,
   2. Ebrahimi A,
   3. Reuss D, et al

   . Distribution of EGFR amplification, combined chromosome 7 gain and chromosome 10 loss, and TERT promoter mutation in brain tumors and their potential for the reclassification of IDH wild type astrocytoma to glioblastoma. Acta Neuropathol 2018;136:793–803 doi:10.1007/s00401-018-1905-0 pmid:30187121

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Tesileanu CM,
   2. Dirven L,
   3. Wijnenga MM, et al

   . Survival of diffuse astrocytic glioma, IDH1/2-wild type, with molecular features of glioblastoma, WHO grade IV: a confirmation of the cIMPACT-NOW criteria. Neuro Oncol 2020;22:515–23 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noz200] pmid:1637414

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. van den Bent MJ,
   2. Brandes AA,
   3. Taphoorn MJ, et al

   . Adjuvant procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine chemotherapy in newly diagnosed anaplastic oligodendroglioma: long-term follow-up of EORTC brain tumor group study 26951. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:344–50 doi:10.1200/JCO.2012.43.2229 pmid:23071237

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Wijnenga MM,
   2. French PJ,
   3. Dubbink HJ, et al

   . The impact of surgery in molecularly defined low-grade glioma: an integrated clinical, radiological, and molecular analysis. Neuro Oncol 2018;20:103–12 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nox176 pmid:29016833

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Kreth FW,
   2. Thon N,
   3. Simon M, et al

   . Gross total but not incomplete resection of glioblastoma prolongs survival in the era of radiochemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2013;24:3117–23 doi:10.1093/annonc/mdt388 pmid:24130262

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Li YM,
   2. Suki D,
   3. Hess K, et al

   . The influence of maximum safe resection of glioblastoma on survival in 1229 patients: can we do better than gross-total resection? J Neurosurg 2016;124:977–88 doi:10.3171/2015.5.JNS142087 pmid:26495941

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Mazurowski MA,
   2. Desjardins A,
   3. Malof JM

   . Imaging descriptors improve the predictive power of survival models for glioblastoma patients. Neuro Oncol 2013;15:1389–94 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos335 pmid:23396489

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Hyare H,
    2. Rice L,
    3. Thust S, et al

    . Modelling MR and clinical features in grade II/III astrocytomas to predict IDH mutation status. Eur J Radiol 2019;114:120–27 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.03.003 pmid:31005161

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Thust SC,
    2. Heiland S,
    3. Falini A, et al

    . Glioma imaging in Europe: a survey of 220 centres and recommendations for best clinical practice. Eur Radiol 2018;28:3306–17 doi:10.1007/s00330-018-5314-5 pmid:29536240

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Patterson DM,
    2. Padhani AR,
    3. Collins DJ

    . Technology insight: water diffusion MRI–a potential new biomarker of response to cancer therapy. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2008;5:220–33 doi:10.1038/ncponc1073 pmid:18301415

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Leu K,
    2. Ott GA,
    3. Lai A, et al

    . Perfusion and diffusion MRI signatures in histologic and genetic subtypes of WHO grade II-III diffuse gliomas. J Neurooncol 2017;134:177–88 doi:10.1007/s11060-017-2506-9 pmid:28547590

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Xing Z,
    2. Yang X,
    3. She D, et al

    . Noninvasive assessment of IDH mutational status in World Health Organization grade II and III astrocytomas using DWI and DSC-PWI combined with conventional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:1138–44 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5171 pmid:28450436

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Wasserman JK,
    2. Nicholas G,
    3. Yaworski R, et al

    . Radiological and pathological features associated with IDH1-R132H mutation status and early mortality in newly diagnosed anaplastic astrocytic tumours. PLoS One 2015;10:e0123890 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0123890 pmid:25849605

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Liu T,
    2. Cheng G,
    3. Kang X, et al

    . Noninvasively evaluating the grading and IDH1 mutation status of diffuse gliomas by three-dimensional pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling and diffusion-weighted imaging. Neuroradiology 2018;60:693–702 doi:10.1007/s00234-018-2021-5 pmid:29777252

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Jaunmuktane Z,
    2. Capper D,
    3. Jones DTW, et al

    . Methylation array profiling of adult brain tumours: diagnostic outcomes in a large, single centre. Acta Neuropathol Commun 2019;7:24 doi:10.1186/s40478-019-0668-8 pmid:30786920

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Reuss DE,
    2. Sahm F,
    3. Schrimpf D, et al

    . ATRX and IDH1-R132H immunohistochemistry with subsequent copy number analysis and IDH sequencing as a basis for an “integrated” diagnostic approach for adult astrocytoma, oligodendroglioma and glioblastoma. Acta Neuropathol 2015;129:133–46 doi:10.1007/s00401-014-1370-3 pmid:25427834

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    1. Johansen-Berg H

    1. Behrens TE

    1. Pipe J

    . Pulse sequences for diffusion-weighted MRI. In: Johansen-Berg H, Behrens TE, eds. Diffusion MRI. Academic Press; 2009:11–35
20. 20.↵
    1. Grech-Sollars M,
    2. Hales PW,
    3. Miyazaki K, et al

    . Multi-centre reproducibility of diffusion MRI parameters for clinical sequences in the brain. NMR Biomed 2015;28:468–85 doi:10.1002/nbm.3269 pmid:25802212

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Maynard J,
    2. Okuchi S,
    3. Wastling S, et al

    . World Health Organization grade II/III glioma molecular status: prediction by MRI morphologic features and apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology 2020;296:111–21 doi:10.1148/radiol.2020191832 pmid:32315266

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Thust SC,
    2. Hassanein S,
    3. Bisdas S, et al

    . Apparent diffusion coefficient for molecular subtyping of non-gadolinium-enhancing WHO grade II/III glioma: volumetric segmentation versus two-dimensional region of interest analysis. Eur Radiol 2018;28:3779–88 doi:10.1007/s00330-018-5351-0 pmid:29572636

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Yushkevich PA,
    2. Piven J,
    3. Hazlett HC, et al

    . User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 2006;31:1116–28 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015 pmid:16545965

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Jenkinson M,
    2. Bannister P,
    3. Brady M, et al

    . Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. Neuroimage 2002;17:825–41 doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1132 pmid:12377157

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Jenkinson M,
    2. Smith S

    . A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal 2001;5:143–56 doi:10.1016/S1361-8415(01)00036-6 pmid:11516708

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Louis DN,
    2. Ohgaki H,
    3. Wiestler OD, et al

    . The 2007 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System. Acta Neuropathol 2007;114:97–109 doi:10.1007/s00401-007-0243-4 pmid:17618441

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    1. Hilario A,
    2. Ramos A,
    3. Perez-Nuñez A, et al

    . The added value of apparent diffusion coefficient to cerebral blood volume in the preoperative grading of diffuse gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:701–07 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2846 pmid:22207304

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    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
29. 29.↵
    1. Figini M,
    2. Riva M,
    3. Graham M, et al

    . Prediction of isocitrate dehydrogenase genotype in brain gliomas with MRI: single-shell versus multishell diffusion models. Radiology 2018;289:788–96 doi:10.1148/radiol.2018180054 pmid:30277427

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    1. Villanueva-Meyer JE,
    2. Wood MD,
    3. Choi BS, et al

    . MRI Features and IDH Mutational Status of Grade II Diffuse Gliomas: Impact on Diagnosis and Prognosis. American Journal of Roentgenology 2018;210:621–28 doi:10.2214/AJR.17.18457 pmid:29261348

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Johnson DR,
    2. Diehn FE,
    3. Giannini C, et al

    . Genetically defined oligodendroglioma is characterized by indistinct tumor borders at MRI. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:678–84 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5070 pmid:28126746

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    1. Cui Y,
    2. Ma L,
    3. Chen X, et al

    . Lower apparent diffusion coefficients indicate distinct prognosis in low-grade and high-grade glioma. J Neurooncol 2014;119:377–85 doi:10.1007/s11060-014-1490-6 pmid:24874469

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Sadeghi N,
    2. Camby I,
    3. Goldman S, et al

    . Effect of hydrophilic components of the extracellular matrix on quantifiable diffusion-weighted imaging of human gliomas: preliminary results of correlating apparent diffusion coefficient values and hyaluronan expression level. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:235–41 doi:10.2214/ajr.181.1.1810235 pmid:12818866

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Han X,
    2. Suo S,
    3. Sun Y, et al

    . Apparent diffusion coefficient measurement in glioma: Influence of region-of-interest determination methods on apparent diffusion coefficient values, interobserver variability, time efficiency, and diagnostic ability. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;45:722–30 doi:10.1002/jmri.25405 pmid:27527072

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Takano K,
    2. Kinoshita M,
    3. Arita H, et al

    . Influence of region-of-interest designs on quantitative measurement of multimodal imaging of MR non-enhancing gliomas. Oncol Lett 2018;15:7934–40 doi:10.3892/ol.2018.8319 pmid:29725480

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Aboian MS,
    2. Tong E,
    3. Solomon DA, et al

    . Diffusion characteristics of pediatric diffuse midline gliomas with histone H3-K27M mutation using apparent diffusion coefficient histogram analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:1804–10 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6302 pmid:31694820

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
37. 37.↵
    1. Chen H,
    2. Hu W,
    3. He H, et al

    . Noninvasive assessment of H3 K27M mutational status in diffuse midline gliomas using apparent diffusion coefficient measurements. Eur J Radiol 2019;114:152–59 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.03.006 pmid:31694820

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    1. Tan WL,
    2. Huang WY,
    3. Yin B, et al

    . Can diffusion tensor imaging noninvasively detect IDH1 gene mutations in astrogliomas? A retrospective study of 112 cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:920–97 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3803 pmid:24557705

    Abstract/FREE Full Text