Imaging Genomics of Glioma Revisited: Analytic Methods to Understand Spatial and Temporal Heterogeneity

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Diehn M,
   2. Nardini C,
   3. Wang DS, et al

   . Identification of noninvasive imaging surrogates for brain tumor gene-expression modules. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:5213–18 doi:10.1073/pnas.0801279105 pmid:18362333

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   1. Kumar V,
   2. Gu Y,
   3. Basu S, et al

   . Radiomics: the process and the challenges. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:1234–48 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2012.06.010 pmid:22898692

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Hosny A,
   2. Parmar C,
   3. Quackenbush J, et al

   . Artificial intelligence in radiology. Nat Rev Cancer 2018;18:500–10 doi:10.1038/s41568-018-0016-5 pmid:29777175

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Gillies RJ,
   2. Kinahan PE,
   3. Hricak H

   . Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology 2016;278:563–77 doi:10.1148/radiol.2015151169 pmid:26579733

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Hiley C,
   2. de Bruin EC,
   3. McGranahan N, et al

   . Deciphering intratumor heterogeneity and temporal acquisition of driver events to refine precision medicine. Genome Biol 2014;15:453 doi:10.1186/s13059-014-0453-8 pmid:25222836

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Waitkus MS,
   2. Diplas BH,
   3. Yan H

   . Isocitrate dehydrogenase mutations in gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2015;18:16–26 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov136 pmid:26188014

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. van den Bent MJ,
   2. Gao Y,
   3. Kerkhof M, et al

   . Changes in the EGFR amplification and EGFRvIII expression between paired primary and recurrent glioblastomas. Neuro Oncol 2015;17:935–41 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov013 pmid:25691693

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Brandes AA,
   2. Franceschi E,
   3. Tosoni A, et al

   . O(6)-methylguanine DNA-methyltransferase methylation status can change between first surgery for newly diagnosed glioblastoma and second surgery for recurrence: clinical implications. Neuro Oncol 2010;12:283–88 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nop050 pmid:20167816

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Esteller M,
   2. Garcia-Foncillas J,
   3. Andion E, et al

   . Inactivation of the DNA-repair gene MGMT and the clinical response of gliomas to alkylating agents. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1350–54 doi:10.1056/NEJM200011093431901 pmid:11070098

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Hegi ME,
    2. Diserens AC,
    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
11. 11.↵
    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
12. 12.↵
    1. Park JE,
    2. Park SY,
    3. Kim HJ, et al

    . Reproducibility and generalizability in radiomics modeling: possible strategies in radiologic and statistical perspectives. Korean J Radiol 2019;20:1124–37 doi:10.3348/kjr.2018.0070 pmid:31270976

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Jiang S,
    2. Eberhart CG,
    3. Zhang Y, et al

    . Amide proton transfer-weighted magnetic resonance image-guided stereotactic biopsy in patients with newly diagnosed gliomas. Eur J Cancer 2017;83:9–18 doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2017.06.009 pmid:28704644

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Verburg N,
    2. Koopman T,
    3. Yaqub MM, et al

    . Improved detection of diffuse glioma infiltration with imaging combinations: a diagnostic accuracy study. Neuro Oncol 2020;22:412–22 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noz180 pmid:31550353

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Park JE,
    2. Kickingereder P,
    3. Kim HS

    . Radiomics and deep learning from research to clinical workflow: neuro-oncologic imaging. Korean J Radiol 2020;21:1126–37 doi:10.3348/kjr.2019.0847 pmid:32729271

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Louis DN,
    2. Perry A,
    3. Wesseling P, et al

    . The 2021 WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Neuro Oncol 2021;23:1231–51 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noab106 pmid:34185076

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Ramos-Fresnedo A,
    2. Pullen MW,
    3. Perez-Vega C, et al

    . The survival outcomes of molecular glioblastoma IDH-wildtype: a multicenter study. J Neurooncol 2022;157:177–85 doi:10.1007/s11060-022-03960-6 pmid:35175545

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Park YW,
    2. Han K,
    3. Ahn SS, et al

    . Prediction of IDH1-mutation and 1p/19q-codeletion status using preoperative MR imaging phenotypes in lower grade gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:37–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5421 pmid:29122763

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Patel SH,
    2. Poisson LM,
    3. Brat DJ, et al

    . T2-FLAIR mismatch, an imaging biomarker for IDH and 1p/19q status in lower-grade gliomas: a TCGA/TCIA project. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:6078–85 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0560 pmid:28751449

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Broen MP,
    2. Smits M,
    3. Wijnenga MM, et al

    . The T2-FLAIR mismatch sign as an imaging marker for non-enhancing IDH-mutant, 1p/19q-intact lower-grade glioma: a validation study. Neuro Oncol 2018;20:1393–99 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noy048 pmid:29590424

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Jain R,
    2. Johnson DR,
    3. Patel SH, et al

    . “Real world” use of a highly reliable imaging sign: “T2-FLAIR mismatch” for identification of IDH mutant astrocytomas. Neuro Oncol 2020;22:936–43 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaa041 pmid:32064507

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Deguchi S,
    2. Oishi T,
    3. Mitsuya K, et al

    . Clinicopathological analysis of T2-FLAIR mismatch sign in lower-grade gliomas. Sci Rep 2020;10:10113 doi:10.1038/s41598-020-67244-7 pmid:32572107

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Onishi S,
    2. Amatya VJ,
    3. Kolakshyapati M, et al

    . T2-FLAIR mismatch sign in dysembryoplasticneuroepithelial tumor. Eur J Radiol 2020;126:108924 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.108924 pmid:32193035

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Johnson DR,
    2. Kaufmann TJ,
    3. Patel SH, et al

    . There is an exception to every rule-T2-FLAIR mismatch sign in gliomas. Neuroradiology 2019;61:225–27 doi:10.1007/s00234-018-2148-4 pmid:30565056

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Lu J,
    2. Li X,
    3. Li H

    . Perfusion parameters derived from MRI for preoperative prediction of IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation status in glioblastomas. Magn Reson Imaging 2021;83:189–95 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2021.09.005 pmid:34506909

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Li Z,
    2. Zhao W,
    3. He B, et al

    . Application of distributed parameter model to assessment of glioma IDH mutation status by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 2020;2020:8843084 doi:10.1155/2020/8843084 pmid:33299387

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Mancini L,
    2. Casagranda S,
    3. Gautier G, et al

    . CEST MRI provides amide/amine surrogate biomarkers for treatment-naïve glioma sub-typing. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022;49:2377–91 doi:10.1007/s00259-022-05676-1 pmid:35029738

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Rohwer N,
    2. Zasada C,
    3. Kempa S, et al

    . The growing complexity of HIF-1α’s role in tumorigenesis: DNA repair and beyond. Oncogene 2013;32:3569–76 doi:10.1038/onc.2012.510 pmid:23160373

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Choi YS,
    2. Bae S,
    3. Chang JH, et al

    . Fully automated hybrid approach to predict the IDH mutation status of gliomas via deep learning and radiomics. Neuro Oncol 2021;23:304–13 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaa177 pmid:32706862

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    1. Lu CF,
    2. Hsu FT,
    3. Hsieh KL, et al

    . Machine learning–based radiomics for molecular subtyping of gliomas. Clin Cancer Res 2018;24:4429–36 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-3445 pmid:29789422

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    1. Chang P,
    2. Grinband J,
    3. Weinberg BD, et al

    . Deep-learning convolutional neural networks accurately classify genetic mutations in gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:1201–07 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5667 pmid:29748206

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    1. Huang LE

    . Impact of CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion on the prognosis and biology of IDH-mutant glioma. Biomedicines 2022;10:246 doi:10.3390/biomedicines10020246 pmid:35203456

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Marker DF,
    2. Pearce TM

    . Homozygous deletion of CDKN2A by fluorescence in situ hybridization is prognostic in grade 4, but not grade 2 or 3 IDH-mutant astrocytomas. Acta Neuropathol Commun 2020;8:169 doi:10.1186/s40478-020-01044-y pmid:33081848

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Paugh BS,
    2. Broniscer A,
    3. Qu C, et al

    . Genome-wide analyses identify recurrent amplifications of receptor tyrosine kinases and cell-cycle regulatory genes in diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:3999–4006 doi:10.1200/JCO.2011.35.5677 pmid:21931021

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    1. Chan KM,
    2. Fang D,
    3. Gan H, et al

    . The histone H3.3K27M mutation in pediatric glioma reprograms H3K27 methylation and gene expression. Genes Dev 2013;27:985–90 doi:10.1101/gad.217778.113 pmid:23603901

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
36. 36.↵
    1. Vallero SG,
    2. Bertero L,
    3. Morana G, et al

    . Pediatric diffuse midline glioma H3K27- altered: a complex clinical and biological landscape behind a neatly defined tumor type. Front Oncol 2022;12:1082062 doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.1082062 pmid:36727064

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    1. Zhang L,
    2. Wang R,
    3. Gao J, et al

    . A novel MRI-based deep learning networks combined with attention mechanism for predicting CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion status in IDH-mutant astrocytoma. Eur Radiol 2023;34:391–99 doi:10.1007/s00330-023-09944-y pmid:37553486

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    1. Gao J,
    2. Liu Z,
    3. Pan H, et al

    . Preoperative discrimination of CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion status in isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant astrocytoma: a deep learning-based radiomics model using MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2023 Aug 9. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1002/jmri.28945 pmid:37555723

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Park YW,
    2. Park KS,
    3. Park JE, et al

    . Qualitative and quantitative magnetic resonance imaging phenotypes may predict CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion status in isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant astrocytomas: a multicenter study. Korean J Radiol 2023;24:133–44 doi:10.3348/kjr.2022.0732 pmid:36725354

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Zhao JP,
    2. Liu XJ,
    3. Lin HZ, et al

    . MRI comparative study of diffuse midline glioma, H3 K27-altered and glioma in the midline without H3 K27-altered. BMC Neurol 2022;22:498 doi:10.1186/s12883-022-03026-0 pmid:36550486

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    1. Kurokawa R,
    2. Kurokawa M,
    3. Baba A, et al

    . Dynamic susceptibility contrast-MRI parameters, ADC values, and the T2-FLAIR mismatch sign are useful to differentiate between H3-mutant and H3-wild-type high-grade midline glioma. Eur Radiol 2022;32:3672–82 doi:10.1007/s00330-021-08476-7 pmid:35022811

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Aboian MS,
    2. Solomon DA,
    3. Felton E, et al

    . Imaging characteristics of pediatric diffuse midline gliomas with histone H3 K27M mutation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:795–800 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5076 pmid:28183840

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
43. 43.↵
    1. Chung C,
    2. Sweha SR,
    3. Pratt D, et al

    . Integrated metabolic and epigenomic reprograming by H3K27M mutations in diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas. Cancer Cell 2020;38:334–49.e9 doi:10.1016/j.ccell.2020.07.008 pmid:32795401

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Eskilsson E,
    2. Røsland GV,
    3. Solecki G, et al

    . EGFR heterogeneity and implications for therapeutic intervention in glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 2018;20:743–52 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nox191 pmid:29040782

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Rizzo S,
    2. Botta F,
    3. Raimondi S, et al

    . Radiomics: the facts and the challenges of image analysis. Eur Radiol Exp 2018;2:36 doi:10.1186/s41747-018-0068-z pmid:30426318

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Wei J,
    2. Yang G,
    3. Hao X, et al

    . A multi-sequence and habitat-based MRI radiomics signature for preoperative prediction of MGMT promoter methylation in astrocytomas with prognostic implication. Eur Radiol 2019;29:877–88 doi:10.1007/s00330-018-5575-z pmid:30039219

    CrossRefPubMed
47. 47.↵
    1. Rathore S,
    2. Akbari H,
    3. Rozycki M, et al

    . Radiomic MRI signature reveals three distinct subtypes of glioblastoma with different clinical and molecular characteristics, offering prognostic value beyond IDH1. Sci Rep 2018;8:5087 doi:10.1038/s41598-018-22739-2 pmid:29572492

    CrossRefPubMed
48. 48.↵
    1. Yogananda CG,
    2. Shah BR,
    3. Nalawade SS, et al

    . MRI-based deep-learning method for determining glioma MGMT promoter methylation status. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2021;42:845–52 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7029 pmid:33664111

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
49. 49.↵
    1. Kim BH,
    2. Lee H,
    3. Choi KS, et al

    . Validation of MRI-based models to predict MGMT promoter methylation in gliomas: BraTS 2021 radiogenomics challenge. Cancers (Basel) 2022;14:14 doi:10.3390/cancers14194827 pmid:36230750

    CrossRefPubMed
50. 50.↵
    1. Hu LS,
    2. Wang L,
    3. Hawkins-Daarud A, et al

    . Uncertainty quantification in the radiogenomics modeling of EGFR amplification in glioblastoma. Sci Rep 2021;11:3932 doi:10.1038/s41598-021-83141-z pmid:33594116

    CrossRefPubMed
51. 51.↵
    1. Li Y,
    2. Liu X,
    3. Xu K, et al

    . MRI features can predict EGFR expression in lower grade gliomas: a voxel-based radiomic analysis. Eur Radiol 2018;28:356–62 doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4964-z pmid:28755054

    CrossRefPubMed
52. 52.↵
    1. Kihira S,
    2. Tsankova NM,
    3. Bauer A, et al

    . Multiparametric MRI texture analysis in prediction of glioma biomarker status: added value of MR diffusion. Neurooncol Adv 2021;3:vdab051 doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdab051 pmid:34056604

    CrossRefPubMed
53. 53.↵
    1. Gupta A,
    2. Young RJ,
    3. Shah AD, et al

    . Pretreatment dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI perfusion in glioblastoma: prediction of EGFR gene amplification. Clin Neuroradiol 2015;25:143–50 doi:10.1007/s00062-014-0289-3 pmid:24474262

    CrossRefPubMed
54. 54.↵
    1. Gu Z,
    2. Eils R,
    3. Schlesner M

    . Complex heatmaps reveal patterns and correlations in multidimensional genomic data. Bioinformatics 2016;32:2847–49 doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw313 pmid:27207943

    CrossRefPubMed
55. 55.↵
    1. Ringnér M

    . What is principal component analysis? Nat Biotechnol 2008;26:303–04 doi:10.1038/nbt0308-303 pmid:18327243

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
56. 56.↵
    1. Akbari H,
    2. Bakas S,
    3. Pisapia JM, et al

    . In vivo evaluation of EGFRvIII mutation in primary glioblastoma patients via complex multiparametric MRI signature. Neuro Oncol 2018;20:1068–79 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noy033 pmid:29617843

    CrossRefPubMed
57. 57.↵
    1. Bakas S,
    2. Akbari H,
    3. Pisapia J, et al

    . In vivo detection of EGFRvIII in glioblastoma via perfusion magnetic resonance imaging signature consistent with deep peritumoral infiltration: the φ-index. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:4724–34 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-1871 pmid:28428190

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
58. 58.↵
    1. Nabors LB,
    2. Portnow J,
    3. Ahluwalia M, et al

    . Central nervous system cancers, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020;18:1537–70 doi:10.6004/jnccn.2020.0052 pmid:33152694

    CrossRefPubMed
59. 59.↵
    1. Stupp R,
    2. Taillibert S,
    3. Kanner A, et al

    . Effect of tumor-treating fields plus maintenance temozolomide vs maintenance temozolomide alone on survival in patients with glioblastoma: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017;318:2306–16 doi:10.1001/jama.2017.18718 pmid:29260225

    CrossRefPubMed
60. 60.↵
    1. Pekmezci M,
    2. Morshed RA,
    3. Chunduru P, et al

    . Detection of glioma infiltration at the tumor margin using quantitative stimulated Raman scattering histology. Sci Rep 2021;11:12162 doi:10.1038/s41598-021-91648-8 pmid:34108566

    CrossRefPubMed
61. 61.↵
    1. Chang PD,
    2. Malone HR,
    3. Bowden SG, et al

    . A multiparametric model for mapping cellularity in glioblastoma using radiographically localized biopsies. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:890–98 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5112 pmid:28255030

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
62. 62.↵
    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. Neurosurgery 2016;78:572–80 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001202 pmid:26813856

    CrossRefPubMed
63. 63.↵
    1. Tian H,
    2. Wu H,
    3. Wu G, et al

    . Noninvasive prediction of TERT promoter mutations in high-grade glioma by radiomics analysis based on multiparameter MRI. Biomed Res Int 2020;2020:3872314 doi:10.1155/2020/3872314 pmid:32509858

    CrossRefPubMed
64. 64.↵
    1. Abdollahi H,
    2. Chin E,
    3. Clark H, et al

    . Radiomics-guided radiation therapy: opportunities and challenges. Phys Med Biol 2022;67 doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ac6fab pmid:35561699

    CrossRefPubMed
65. 65.↵
    1. Lim M,
    2. Weller M,
    3. Idbaih A, et al

    . Phase III trial of chemoradiotherapy with temozolomide plus nivolumab or placebo for newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. Neuro Oncol 2022;24:1935–49 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noac116 pmid:35511454

    CrossRefPubMed
66. 66.↵
    1. Omuro A,
    2. Brandes AA,
    3. Carpentier AF, et al

    . Radiotherapy combined with nivolumab or temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma with unmethylated MGMT promoter: an international randomized phase III trial. Neuro Oncol 2023;25:123–34 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noac099 pmid:35419607

    CrossRefPubMed
67. 67.↵
    1. Cloughesy TF,
    2. Mochizuki AY,
    3. Orpilla JR, et al

    . Neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 immunotherapy promotes a survival benefit with intratumoral and systemic immune responses in recurrent glioblastoma. Nat Med 2019;25:477–86 doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0337-7 pmid:30742122

    CrossRefPubMed
68. 68.↵
    1. George E,
    2. Flagg E,
    3. Chang K, et al

    . Radiomics-based machine learning for outcome prediction in a multicenter Phase II study of programmed death-ligand 1 inhibition immunotherapy for glioblastoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2022;43:675–81 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7488 pmid:35483906

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
69. 69.↵
    1. Khalili N,
    2. Kazerooni AF,
    3. Familiar A, et al

    . Radiomics for characterization of the glioma immune microenvironment. NPJ Precis Oncol 2023;7:59 doi:10.1038/s41698-023-00413-9 pmid:37337080

    CrossRefPubMed
70. 70.↵
    1. Tomaszewski MR,
    2. Gillies RJ

    . The biological meaning of radiomic features. Radiology 2021;298:505–16 doi:10.1148/radiol.2021202553 pmid:33399513

    CrossRefPubMed
71. 71.↵
    1. O’Connor JP,
    2. Rose CJ,
    3. Waterton JC, et al

    . Imaging intratumor heterogeneity: role in therapy response, resistance, and clinical outcome. Clin Cancer Res 2015;21:249–57 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0990 pmid:25421725

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
72. 72.↵
    1. Henning EC,
    2. Azuma C,
    3. Sotak CH, et al

    . Multispectral quantification of tissue types in a RIF-1 tumor model with histological validation: Part I. Magn Reson Med 2007;57:501–12 doi:10.1002/mrm.21161 pmid:17326181

    CrossRefPubMed
73. 73.↵
    1. Carano RA,
    2. Ross AL,
    3. Ross J, et al

    . Quantification of tumor tissue populations by multispectral analysis. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:542–51 doi:10.1002/mrm.10731 pmid:15004796

    CrossRefPubMed
74. 74.↵
    1. Park JE,
    2. Kim HS,
    3. Goh MJ, et al

    . Pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma: assessment by using volume-weighted voxel-based multiparametric clustering of MR imaging data in an independent test set. Radiology 2015;275:792–802 doi:10.1148/radiol.14141414 pmid:25611736

    CrossRefPubMed
75. 75.↵
    1. Jardim-Perassi BV,
    2. Huang S,
    3. Dominguez-Viqueira W, et al

    . Multiparametric MRI and coregistered histology identify tumor habitats in breast cancer mouse models. Cancer Res 2019;79:3952–64 doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-0213 pmid:31186232

    CrossRefPubMed
76. 76.↵
    1. Furnari FB,
    2. Cloughesy TF,
    3. Cavenee WK, et al

    . Heterogeneity of epidermal growth factor receptor signalling networks in glioblastoma. Nat Rev Cancer 2015;15:302–10 doi:10.1038/nrc3918 pmid:25855404

    CrossRefPubMed
77. 77.↵
    1. Kim M,
    2. Park JE,
    3. Kim HS, et al

    . Spatiotemporal habitats from multiparametric physiologic MRI distinguish tumor progression from treatment-related change in post-treatment glioblastoma. Eur Radiol 2021;31:6374–83 doi:10.1007/s00330-021-07718-y pmid:33569615

    CrossRefPubMed