MRI-Based Deep-Learning Method for Determining Glioma MGMT Promoter Methylation Status

References

1. 1.↵
   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
2. 2.↵
   1. Stupp R,
   2. Hegi ME,
   3. Mason WP, et al

   . European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumour and Radiation Oncology Groups. 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
3. 3.↵
   1. Chen R,
   2. Smith-Cohn M,
   3. Cohen AL, et al

   . Glioma subclassifications and their clinical significance. Neurotherapeutics 2017;14:284–97 doi:10.1007/s13311-017-0519-x pmid:28281173

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Suh CH,
   2. Kim HS,
   3. Jung SC, et al

   . Clinically relevant imaging features for MGMT promoter methylation in multiple glioblastoma studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:1439–45 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5711 pmid:30002055

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   1. Drabycz S,
   2. Roldan G,
   3. de Robles P, et al

   . An analysis of image texture, tumor location, and MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma using magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage 2010;49:1398–1405 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.049 pmid:19796694

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Moon WJ,
   2. Choi JW,
   3. Roh HG, et al

   . Imaging parameters of high grade gliomas in relation to the MGMT promoter methylation status: the CT, diffusion tensor imaging, and perfusion MR imaging. Neuroradiology 2012;54:555–63 doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0947-y pmid:21833736

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Ahn SS,
   2. Shin NY,
   3. Chang JH, et al

   . Prediction of methylguanine methyltransferase promoter methylation in glioblastoma using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion tensor imaging. J Neurosurg 2014;121:367–73 doi:10.3171/2014.5.JNS132279 pmid:24949678

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Kanas VG,
   2. Zacharaki EI,
   3. Thomas GA, et al

   . Learning MRI-based classification models for MGMT methylation status prediction in glioblastoma. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2017;140:249–57 doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2016.12.018 pmid:28254081

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Korfiatis P,
   2. Kline TL,
   3. Coufalova L, et al

   . MRI texture features as biomarkers to predict MGMT methylation status in glioblastomas. Med Phys 2016;43:2835–44 doi:10.1118/1.4948668 pmid:27277032

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Sasaki T,
    2. Kinoshita M,
    3. Fujita K, et al

    . Radiomics and MGMT promoter methylation for prognostication of newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Sci Rep 2019;9:14435 doi:10.1038/s41598-019-50849-y pmid:31594994

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    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
12. 12.↵
    1. Yogananda CG,
    2. Shah BR,
    3. Yu FF, et al

    . A novel fully automated MRI-based deep-learning method for classification of 1p/19q co-deletion status in brain gliomas. Neurooncol Adv 2020;2:vdaa066 doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdaa066 pmid:32705083

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Yogananda CG,
    2. Shah BR,
    3. Vejdani-Jahromi M, et al

    . A novel fully automated MRI-based deep-learning method for classification of IDH mutation status in brain gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2019;22:402–11 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noz199 pmid:31637430

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Clark K,
    2. Vendt B,
    3. Smith K, et al

    . The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA): maintaining and operating a public information repository. J Digit Imaging 2013;26:1045–57 doi:10.1007/s10278-013-9622-7 pmid:23884657

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Puchalski RB,
    2. Shah N,
    3. Miller J, et al

    . An anatomic transcriptional atlas of human glioblastoma. Science 2018;360:660–63 doi:10.1126/science.aaf2666 pmid:29748285

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Erickson B,
    2. Akkus Z,
    3. Sedlar J

    , eet al. Data From LGG-1p19qDeletion. The Cancer Imaging Archive. 2017;76. https://doi.org/10.7937/K9/TCIA.2017.dwehtz9v. Accessed November 30, 2017
17. 17.↵
    1. Ceccarelli M,
    2. Barthel FP,
    3. Malta TM, et al

    . TCGA Research Network. Molecular profiling reveals biologically discrete subsets and pathways of progression in diffuse glioma. Cell 2016;164:550–63 doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.028 pmid:26824661

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Menze BH,
    2. Jakab A,
    3. Bauer S, et al

    . The multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS). IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2015;34:1993–2024 doi:10.1109/TMI.2014.2377694 pmid:25494501

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Bakas S,
    2. Akbari H,
    3. Sotiras A, et al

    . Advancing The Cancer Genome Atlas glioma MRI collections with expert segmentation labels and radiomic features. Sci Data 2017;4:170117 doi:10.1038/sdata.2017.117 pmid:28872634

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Yogananda CG,
    2. Shah BR,
    3. Vejdani-Jahromi M, et al

    . A novel fully automated MRI-based deep learning method for classification of IDH mutation status in brain gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2020;22:402–11 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noz199 pmid:31637430

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    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

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Rohlfing T,
    2. Zahr NM,
    3. Sullivan EV, et al

    . The SRI24 multichannel atlas of normal adult human brain structure. Hum Brain Mapp 2010;31:798–819 doi:10.1002/hbm.20906 pmid:20017133

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Smith SM

    . Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 2002;17:143–55 doi:10.1002/hbm.10062 pmid:12391568

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Smith SM,
    2. Jenkinson M,
    3. Woolrich MW, et al

    . Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. Neuroimage 2004;23(Suppl 1):S208–19 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.05]1 pmid:15501092

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Woolrich MW,
    2. Jbabdi S,
    3. Patenaude B, et al

    . Bayesian analysis of neuroimaging data in FSL. Neuroimage 2009;45:S173–86 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.10.055 pmid:19059349

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Jenkinson M,
    2. Beckmann CF,
    3. Behrens TE, et al

    . FSL. Neuroimage 2012;62:782– 90 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.015 pmid:21979382

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    1. Tustison NJ,
    2. Cook PA,
    3. Klein A, et al

    . Large-scale evaluation of ANTs and FreeSurfer cortical thickness measurements. Neuroimage 2014;99:166–79 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.044 pmid:24879923

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    1. Petrick N,
    2. Mori K

    1. Wegmayr VA,
    2. Aitharajus S,
    3. Buhmann J, et al

    . Classification of brain MRI with big data and deep 3D convolutional neural networks. In: Petrick N, Mori K, eds. Medical Imaging 2018: Computer-Aided Diagnosis. SPIE Proceedings 2018;1057501 doi:10.1117/12.2293719

    CrossRef
29. 29.↵
    1. Feng X,
    2. Yang J,
    3. Lipton ZC, et al

    . Deep larning on MRI affirms the prominence of the hippocampal formation in Alzheimer’s disease classification. bioRxiv 2018 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/456277v1.full.pdf. Accessed April 8, 2020
30. 30.↵
    1. Abadi M,
    2. Barham P,
    3. Chen

    J, et al. Tensorflow: a system for large-scale machine learning. 12th (USENIX) symposium on operating systems design and implementation (OSDI 16); 2016:265–283. May 27, 2016. https://arxiv.org/a bs/1605.08695. Accessed April 24, 2018
31. 31.↵
    1. Chollet F. Keras

    : The python deep learning library. Astrophysics Source Code Library 2018. https://keras.io/. Accessed February 10, 2018
32. 32.↵
    1. Kingma DP,
    2. Ba JL

    . Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations, San Diego, California. May 7–9, 2015
33. 33.↵
    1. Korfiatis P,
    2. Kline TL,
    3. Lachance DH, et al

    . Residual deep convolutional neural network predicts MGMT methylation status. J Digit Imaging 2017;30:622–28 doi:10.1007/s10278-017-0009-z pmid:28785873

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Han L,
    2. Kamdar MR

    . MRI to MGMT: predicting methylation status in glioblastoma patients using convolutional recurrent neural networks. Pac Symp Biocomput 2018;23:331–42 pmid:29218894

    PubMed
35. 35.↵
    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
36. 36.↵
    1. Jégou S,
    2. Drozdzal M,
    3. Vazquez D, et al

    . The one hundred layers tiramisu: fully convolutional densenets for semantic segmentation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops. 2017:11–19. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/conhome/8014302/proceeding. Accessed March 28, 2018
37. 37.↵
    1. Wang G,
    2. Li W,
    3. Ourselin S, et al

    . Automatic brain tumor segmentation based on cascaded convolutional neural networks with uncertainty estimation. Front Comput Neurosci 2019;13:56 doi:10.3389/fncom.2019.00056 pmid:31456678

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    1. Everhard S,
    2. Tost J,
    3. El Abdalaoui H, et al

    . Identification of regions correlating MGMT promoter methylation and gene expression in glioblastomas. Neuro Oncol 2009;11:348–56 doi:10.1215/15228517-2009-001 pmid:19224763

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
39. 39.↵
    1. Cankovic M,
    2. Nikiforova MN,
    3. Snuderl M, et al

    . The role of MGMT testing in clinical practice: a report of the association for molecular pathology. J Mol Diagn 2013;15:539–55 doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2013.05.011 pmid:23871769

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Estival A,
    2. Sanz C,
    3. Ramirez JL, et al

    . Pyrosequencing versus methylation-specific PCR for assessment of MGMT methylation in tumor and blood samples of glioblastoma patients. Sci Rep 2019;9:11125 doi:10.1038/s41598-019-47642-2

    CrossRef
41. 41.↵
    1. Poulin M,
    2. Zhou JY,
    3. Yan L, et al

    . Pyrosequencing methylation analysis. Methods Mol Biol 2018;1856:283–96 doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-8751-1_17 pmid:30178259

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Bady P,
    2. Sciuscio D,
    3. Diserens AC, et al

    . MGMT methylation analysis of glioblastoma on the Infinium methylation BeadChip identifies two distinct CpG regions associated with gene silencing and outcome, yielding a prediction model for comparisons across datasets, tumor grades, and CIMP-status. Acta Neuropathol 2012;124:547–60 doi:10.1007/s00401-012-1016-2 pmid:22810491

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
43. 43.↵
    Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature 2008;455:1061–68 doi:10.1038/nature07385 pmid:18772890

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science