Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative and Physiological Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Glioma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Functional Neuroradiology

Abstract

Gliomas are the most common intracerebral tumors in adults and pose significant imaging and treatment challenges due to their invasive nature, and wide variability in tumor biology and behavior. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is pivotal in the clinical management of glioma; however, routine structural protocols and radiologic assessment that are widely used in clinical practice and therapeutic trials lack biological specificity and have limited sensitivity to early changes in tumor status. In this chapter, we examine how advanced quantitative and physiological MRI techniques may add value to imaging evaluation in the pre-therapeutic, peri-therapeutic, and post-therapeutic phases of the glioma patient’s clinical pathway. We review the evidence for the utility of these techniques in the context of current molecular tissue diagnostics and treatment regimens, and their limitations and barriers to widespread clinical adoption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rasmussen BK, Hansen S, Laursen RJ, Kosteljanetz M, Schultz H, NørgĂ¥rd BM, Guldberg R, Gradel KO. Epidemiology of glioma: clinical characteristics, symptoms, and predictors of glioma patients grade I-IV in the Danish Neuro-Oncology Registry. J Neurooncol. 2017;135(3):571–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bailey P, Cushing H. A classification of the tumours of the glioma group on a histogenetic basis with a correlated study of prognosis. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kernohan JW, Mabon RF, et al. A simplified classification of the gliomas. Proc Staff Meet Mayo Clin. 1949;24(3):71–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ringertz N. Grading of gliomas. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand. 1950;27(1):51–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Figarella-Branger D, Cavenee WK, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Kleihues P, Ellison DW. The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol. 2016;131(6):803–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen AL, Holmen SL, Colman H. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2013;13(5):345.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, Brat DJ, Verhaak RG, Aldape KD, Yung WK, Salama SR, Cooper LA, et al. Comprehensive, integrative genomic analysis of diffuse lower-grade gliomas. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(26):2481–98.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Reuss DE, Mamatjan Y, Schrimpf D, Capper D, Hovestadt V, Kratz A, et al. IDH mutant diffuse and anaplastic astrocytomas have similar age at presentation and little difference in survival: a grading problem for WHO. Acta Neuropathol. 2015;129(6):867–73.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Suh CH, Kim HS, Jung SC, Choi CG, Kim SJ. 2-Hydroxyglutarate MR spectroscopy for prediction of isocitrate dehydrogenase mutant glioma: a systemic review and meta-analysis using individual patient data. Neuro Oncol. 2018;20(12):1573–83.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Camelo-Piragua S, Jansen M, Ganguly A, Kim JC, Louis DN, Nutt CL. Mutant IDH1-specific immunohistochemistry distinguishes diffuse astrocytoma from astrocytosis. Acta Neuropathol. 2010;119(4):509–11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Horbinski C, Kofler J, Kelly LM, Murdoch GH, Nikiforova MN. Diagnostic use of IDH1/2 mutation analysis in routine clinical testing of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded glioma tissues. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2009;68(12):1319–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hartmann C, Meyer J, Balss J, Capper D, Mueller W, Christians A, et al. Type and frequency of IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are related to astrocytic and oligodendroglial differentiation and age: a study of 1,010 diffuse gliomas. Acta Neuropathol. 2009;118(4):469–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Picca A, Berzero G, Bielle F, Touat M, Savatovsky J, Polivka M, et al. FGFR1 actionable mutations, molecular specificities, and outcome of adult midline gliomas. Neurology. 2018;90(23):e2086–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cairncross JG, Ueki K, Zlatescu MC, Lisle DK, Finkelstein DM, Hammond RR, et al. Specific genetic predictors of chemotherapeutic response and survival in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(19):1473–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Griffin CA, Burger P, Morsberger L, Yonescu R, Swierczynski S, Weingart JD, Murphy KM. Identification of der(1;19)(q10;p10) in five oligodendrogliomas suggests mechanism of concurrent 1p and 19q loss. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2006;65(10):988–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jenkins RB, Blair H, Ballman KV, Giannini C, Arusell RM, Law M, Flynn H, Passe S, Felten S, Brown PD, Shaw EG, Buckner JC. A t(1;19)(q10;p10) mediates the combined deletions of 1p and 19q and predicts a better prognosis of patients with oligodendroglioma. Cancer Res. 2006;66(20):9852–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nandakumar P, Mansouri A, Das S. The role of ATRX in glioma biology. Front Oncol. 2017;7:236.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Wick W, Weller M, van den Bent M, Sanson M, Weiler M, von Deimling A, Plass C, Hegi M, Platten M, Reifenberger G. MGMT testing—the challenges for biomarker-based glioma treatment. Nat Rev Neurol. 2014;10(7):372–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mansouri A, Hachem LD, Mansouri S, Nassiri F, Laperriere NJ, Xia D, Lindeman NI, Wen PY, Chakravarti A, Mehta MP, Hegi ME, Stupp R, Aldape KD, Zadeh G. MGMT promoter methylation status testing to guide therapy for glioblastoma: refining the approach based on emerging evidence and current challenges. Neuro Oncol. 2019;21(2):167–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hegi ME, Diserens AC, Gorlia T, Hamou MF, de Tribolet N, Weller M, Kros JM, Hainfellner JA, Mason W, Mariani L, Bromberg JE, Hau P, Mirimanoff RO, Cairncross JG, Janzer RC, Stupp R. MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(10):997–1003.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, et al. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor and Radiotherapy Groups; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(10):987–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Stupp R, Hegi ME, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Taphoorn MJ, Janzer RC, et al. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumour and Radiation Oncology Groups; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. 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(5):459–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pope WB, Brandal G. Conventional and advanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with high-grade glioma. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;62(3):239–53.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Waldman AD, Jackson A, Price SJ, Clark CA, Booth TC, Auer DP, Tofts PS, Collins DJ, Leach MO, Rees JH, National Cancer Research Institute Brain Tumour Imaging Subgroup. Quantitative imaging biomarkers in neuro-oncology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2009;6(8):445–54.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ellingson BM, Malkin MG, Rand SD, Connelly JM, Quinsey C, LaViolette PS, Bedekar DP, Schmainda KM. Validation of functional diffusion maps (fDMs) as a biomarker for human glioma cellularity. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31(3):538–48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, Ikushima I, Shigematu Y, Hirai T, et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;9(1):53–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zamecnik J. The extracellular space and matrix of gliomas. Acta Neuropathol. 2005;110(5):435–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sadeghi N, Camby I, Goldman S, Gabius HJ, Balériaux D, Salmon I, Decaesteckere C, Kiss R, Metens T. 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(1):235–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Liu T, Cheng G, Kang X, Xi Y, Zhu Y, Wang K, Sun C, Ye J, Li P, Yin H. 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(7):693–702.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bai Y, Lin Y, Tian J, Shi D, Cheng J, Haacke EM, et al. Grading of gliomas by using monoexponential, biexponential, and stretched exponential diffusion-weighted MR imaging and diffusion kurtosis MR imaging. Radiology. 2016;278(2):496–504.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fudaba H, Shimomura T, Abe T, Matsuta H, Momii Y, Sugita K, et al. Comparison of multiple parameters obtained on 3T pulsed arterial spin-labeling, diffusion tensor imaging, and MRS and the Ki-67 labeling index in evaluating glioma grading. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35(11):2091–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Shen N, Zhao L, Jiang J, Jiang R, Su C, Zhang S, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging analysis of diffusion and microperfusion in grading gliomas and comparison with arterial spin labeling for evaluation of tumor perfusion. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016;44(3):620–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Server A, Graff BA, Josefsen R, Orheim TE, Schellhorn T, Nordhøy W, Nakstad PH. Analysis of diffusion tensor imaging metrics for gliomas grading at 3 T. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(3):e156–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Han H, Han C, Wu X, Zhong S, Zhuang X, Tan G, Wu H. Preoperative grading of supratentorial nonenhancing gliomas by high b-value diffusion-weighted 3 T magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurooncol. 2017;133(1):147–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tozer DJ, Jäger HR, Danchaivijitr N, Benton CE, Tofts PS, Rees JH, Waldman AD. Apparent diffusion coefficient histograms may predict low-grade glioma subtype. NMR Biomed. 2007;20(1):49–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Khayal IS, McKnight TR, McGue C, Vandenberg S, Lamborn KR, Chang SM, Cha S, Nelson SJ. Apparent diffusion coefficient and fractional anisotropy of newly diagnosed grade II gliomas. NMR Biomed. 2009;22(4):449–55.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Cha S. Update on brain tumor imaging: from anatomy to physiology. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27(3):475–87.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Thust SC, Hassanein S, Bisdas S, Rees JH, Hyare H, Maynard JA, 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(9):3779–88.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Wu CC, Jain R, Radmanesh A, Poisson LM, Guo WY, Zagzag D, et al. Predicting genotype and survival in glioma using standard clinical MR imaging apparent diffusion coefficient images: a pilot study from the cancer genome atlas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018;39(10):1814–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Leu K, Ott GA, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Pope WB, Yong WH, Liau LM, Cloughesy TF, Ellingson BM. Perfusion and diffusion MRI signatures in histologic and genetic subtypes of WHO grade II-III diffuse gliomas. J Neurooncol. 2017;134(1):177–88.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Chawla S, Krejza J, Vossough A, Zhang Y, Kapoor GS, Wang S, et al. Differentiation between oligodendroglioma genotypes using dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion-weighted imaging and proton MR spectroscopy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(8):1542–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Soliman RK, Gamal SA, Essa AA, Othman MH. Preoperative grading of glioma using dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI: relative cerebral blood volume analysis of intra-tumoural and peri-tumoural tissue. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018;167:86–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Hilario A, Ramos A, Perez-Nuñez A, Salvador E, Millan JM, Lagares 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(4):701–7.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Mannelli L, Nougaret S, Vargas HA, Do RK. Advances in diffusion-weighted imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2015;53(3):569–81.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Bennett KM, Schmainda KM, Bennett RT, Rowe DB, Lu H, Hyde JS. Characterization of continuously distributed cortical water diffusion rates with a stretched-exponential model. Magn Reson Med. 2003;50(4):727–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Raja R, Sinha N, Saini J, Mahadevan A, Rao KN, Swaminathan A. Assessment of tissue heterogeneity using diffusion tensor and diffusion kurtosis imaging for grading gliomas. Neuroradiology. 2016;58(12):1217–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cao M, Suo S, Han X, Jin K, Sun Y, Wang Y, Ding W, Qu J, Zhang X, Zhou Y. Application of a simplified method for estimating perfusion derived from diffusion-weighted MR imaging in glioma grading. Front Aging Neurosci. 2018;9:432.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Hu YC, Yan LF, Wu L, Du P, Chen BY, Wang L, Wang SM, Han Y, Tian Q, Yu Y, Xu TY, Wang W, Cui GB. Intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MR imaging of gliomas: efficacy in preoperative grading. Sci Rep. 2014;4:7208.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Jackson A, O’Connor J, Thompson G, Mills S. Magnetic resonance perfusion imaging in neuro-oncology. Cancer Imaging. 2008;8(1):186–99.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Davanian F, Faeghi F, Shahzadi S, Farshifar Z. Diffusion tensor imaging for glioma grading: analysis of fiber density index. Basic Clin Neurosci. 2017;8(1):13–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Zhao J, Li JB, Wang JY, Wang YL, Liu DW, Li XB, et al. Quantitative analysis of neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging in grading gliomas and detecting IDH-1 gene mutation status. Neuroimage Clin. 2018;19:174–81.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Raab P, Hattingen E, Franz K, Zanella FE, Lanfermann H. Cerebral gliomas: diffusional kurtosis imaging analysis of microstructural differences. Radiology. 2010;254(3):876–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Dean BL, Drayer BP, Bird CR, Flom RA, Hodak JA, Coons SW, Carey RG. Gliomas: classification with MR imaging. Radiology. 1990;174(2):411–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Daumas-Duport C, Scheithauer B, O’Fallon J, Kelly P. Grading of astrocytomas. A simple and reproducible method. Cancer. 1988;62(10):2152–65.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Zhang J, Liu H, Tong H, Wang S, Yang Y, Liu G, Zhang W. Clinical applications of contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI techniques in gliomas: recent advances and current challenges. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2017;2017:7064120.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Stokes AM, Semmineh NB, Nespodzany A, Bell LC, Quarles CC. Systematic assessment of multi-echo dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI using a digital reference object. Magn Reson Med. 2020;83(1):109–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Leu K, Boxerman JL, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Liau LM, Pope WB, Ellingson BM. Improved leakage correction for single-echo dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MRI estimates of relative cerebral blood volume in high-grade gliomas by accounting for bidirectional contrast agent exchange. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016;37(8):1440–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Jackson A. Analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI. Br J Radiol. 2004;77 Spec No 2:S154–66.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Law M, Yang S, Babb JS, Knopp EA, Golfinos JG, Zagzag D, Johnson G. 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(5):746–55.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Law M, Young R, Babb J, Pollack E, Johnson G. Histogram analysis versus region of interest analysis of dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging data in the grading of cerebral gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28(4):761–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Cha S, Tihan T, Crawford F, Fischbein NJ, Chang S, Bollen A, et al. Differentiation of low-grade oligodendrogliomas from low-grade astrocytomas by using quantitative blood-volume measurements derived from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26(2):266–73.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Jenkinson MD, Smith TS, Joyce KA, Fildes D, Broome J, du Plessis DG, Haylock B, Husband DJ, Warnke PC, Walker C. Cerebral blood volume, genotype and chemosensitivity in oligodendroglial tumours. Neuroradiology. 2006;48(10):703–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Tan W, Xiong J, Huang W, Wu J, Zhan S, Geng D. Noninvasively detecting Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 gene status in astrocytoma by dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;45(2):492–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Bisdas S, Kirkpatrick M, Giglio P, Welsh C, Spampinato MV, Rumboldt Z. Cerebral blood volume measurements by perfusion-weighted MR imaging in gliomas: ready for prime time in predicting short-term outcome and recurrent disease? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(4):681–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Lev MH, Ozsunar Y, Henson JW, Rasheed AA, Barest GD, Harsh GR IV, 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(2):214–21. Erratum in: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004;25(3):B1.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Anzalone N, Castellano A, Cadioli M, Conte GM, Cuccarini V, Bizzi A, et al. Brain gliomas: multicenter standardized assessment of dynamic contrast-enhanced and dynamic susceptibility contrast MR images. Radiology. 2018;287(3):933–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhao M, Guo LL, Huang N, Wu Q, Zhou L, Zhao H, Zhang J, Fu K. Quantitative analysis of permeability for glioma grading using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Oncol Lett. 2017;14(5):5418–26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Jain KK, Sahoo P, Tyagi R, Mehta A, Patir R, Vaishya S, Prakash N, Vasudev N, Gupta RK. Prospective glioma grading using single-dose dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI. Clin Radiol. 2015;70(10):1128–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Brendle C, Hempel JM, Schittenhelm J, Skardelly M, Tabatabai G, Bender B, Ernemann U, Klose U. Glioma grading and determination of IDH mutation status and ATRX loss by DCE and ASL perfusion. Clin Neuroradiol. 2018;28(3):421–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Schmainda KM, Prah MA, Rand SD, Liu Y, Logan B, Muzi M, et al. Multisite concordance of DSC-MRI analysis for brain tumors: results of a National Cancer Institute Quantitative Imaging Network Collaborative Project. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018;39(6):1008–16.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. HorskĂ¡ A, Barker PB. Imaging of brain tumors: MR spectroscopy and metabolic imaging. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2010;20(3):293–310.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Law M, Yang S, Wang H, Babb JS, Johnson G, Cha S, 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(10):1989–98.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Bian W, Khayal IS, Lupo JM, McGue C, Vandenberg S, Lamborn KR, et al. Multiparametric characterization of grade 2 glioma subtypes using magnetic resonance spectroscopic, perfusion, and diffusion imaging. Transl Oncol. 2009;2(4):271–80.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Toyooka M, Kimura H, Uematsu H, Kawamura Y, Takeuchi H, Itoh H. Tissue characterization of glioma by proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy and perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: glioma grading and histological correlation. Clin Imaging. 2008;32(4):251–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Senft C, Hattingen E, Pilatus U, Franz K, Schänzer A, Lanfermann H, Seifert V, Gasser T. Diagnostic value of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the noninvasive grading of solid gliomas: comparison of maximum and mean choline values. Neurosurgery. 2009;65(5):908–13; discussion 913.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Collet S, Valable S, Constans JM, Lechapt-Zalcman E, Roussel S, Delcroix N, et al. [(18)F]-fluoro-L-thymidine PET and advanced MRI for preoperative grading of gliomas. Neuroimage Clin. 2015;8:448–54.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Wang Q, Zhang H, Zhang J, Wu C, Zhu W, Li F, Chen X, Xu B. The diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance spectroscopy in differentiating high-from low-grade gliomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(8):2670–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Watanabe T, Nobusawa S, Kleihues P, Ohgaki H. IDH1 mutations are early events in the development of astrocytomas and oligodendrogliomas. Am J Pathol. 2009;174(4):1149–53.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Dang L, White DW, Gross S, Bennett BD, Bittinger MA, Driggers EM, Fantin VR, Jang HG, Jin S, Keenan MC, Marks KM, Prins RM, Ward PS, Yen KE, Liau LM, Rabinowitz JD, Cantley LC, Thompson CB, Vander Heiden MG, Su SM. Cancer-associated IDH1 mutations produce 2-hydroxyglutarate. Nature. 2009;462(7274):739–44.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Andronesi OC, Rapalino O, Gerstner E, Chi A, Batchelor TT, Cahill DP, Sorensen AG, Rosen BR. Detection of oncogenic IDH1 mutations using magnetic resonance spectroscopy of 2-hydroxyglutarate. J Clin Invest. 2013;123(9):3659–63.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Jalbert LE, Elkhaled A, Phillips JJ, Neill E, Williams A, Crane JC, et al. Metabolic profiling of IDH mutation and malignant progression in infiltrating glioma. Sci Rep. 2017;7:44792.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Branzoli F, Pontoizeau C, Tchara L, Di Stefano AL, Kamoun A, Deelchand DK, et al. Cystathionine as a marker for 1p/19q codeleted gliomas by in vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Neuro Oncol. 2019;21(6):765–74.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. de la Fuente MI, Young RJ, Rubel J, Rosenblum M, Tisnado J, Briggs S, et al. Integration of 2-hydroxyglutarate-proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy into clinical practice for disease monitoring in isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2016;18(2):283–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Drabycz S, RoldĂ¡n G, de Robles P, Adler D, McIntyre JB, Magliocco AM, Cairncross JG, Mitchell JR. An analysis of image texture, tumor location, and MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma using magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage. 2010;49(2):1398–405.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Pope WB, Zaw TM, Phillips H, Lalezari S, et al. Anatomic localization of O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylated and unmethylated tumors: a radiographic study in 358 de novo human glioblastomas. Neuroimage. 2012;59(2):908–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Pope WB, Lai A, Mehta R, Kim HJ, Qiao J, Young JR, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient histogram analysis stratifies progression-free survival in newly diagnosed bevacizumab-treated glioblastoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(5):882–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Moon WJ, Choi JW, Roh HG, Lim SD, Koh YC. 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(6):555–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Ahn SS, Shin NY, Chang JH, Kim SH, Kim EH, Kim DW, Lee SK. Prediction of methylguanine methyltransferase promoter methylation in glioblastoma using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion tensor imaging. J Neurosurg. 2014;121(2):367–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Ryoo I, Choi SH, Kim JH, Sohn CH, Kim SC, Shin HS, et al. Cerebral blood volume calculated by dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging: preliminary correlation study with glioblastoma genetic profiles. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71704.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Han Y, Yan LF, Wang XB, Sun YZ, Zhang X, Liu ZC, et al. Structural and advanced imaging in predicting MGMT promoter methylation of primary glioblastoma: a region of interest based analysis. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):215.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Bogdańska MU, Bodnar M, Piotrowska MJ, Murek M, Schucht P, Beck J, et al. A mathematical model describes the malignant transformation of low grade gliomas: prognostic implications. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0179999.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Smith JS, Chang EF, Lamborn KR, Chang SM, Prados MD, Cha S, et al. Role of extent of resection in the long-term outcome of low-grade hemispheric gliomas. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1338–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Jakola AS, UnsgĂ¥rd G, Myrmel KS, Kloster R, Torp SH, Losvik OK, et al. Surgical strategy in grade II astrocytoma: a population-based analysis of survival and morbidity with a strategy of early resection as compared to watchful waiting. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2013;155(12):2227–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Wijnenga MMJ, Mattni T, French PJ, Rutten GJ, Leenstra S, Kloet F, et al. Does early resection of presumed low-grade glioma improve survival? A clinical perspective. J Neurooncol. 2017;133(1):137–46.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Sundgren PC, Fan X, Weybright P, Welsh RC, Carlos RC, Petrou M, et al. Differentiation of recurrent brain tumor versus radiation injury using diffusion tensor imaging in patients with new contrast-enhancing lesions. Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24(9):1131–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Murphy E, Leyrer Leyrer CM, Parsons M, Suh J, Chao S, Yu J, et al. RTHP-31. Low grade glioma malignant transformation (MT): clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in temozolomide era. Neuro Oncol. 2016;18(Suppl 6):vi180.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Chaichana KL, McGirt MJ, Laterra J, Olivi A, Quiñones-Hinojosa A. Recurrence and malignant degeneration after resection of adult hemispheric low-grade gliomas. J Neurosurg. 2010;112(1):10–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Pallud J, Capelle L, Taillandier L, Fontaine D, Mandonnet E, Guillevin R, et al. Prognostic significance of imaging contrast enhancement for WHO grade II gliomas. Neuro Oncol. 2009;11(2):176–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Ginsberg LE, Fuller GN, Hashmi M, Leeds NE, Schomer DF. The significance of lack of MR contrast enhancement of supratentorial brain tumors in adults: histopathological evaluation of a series. Surg Neurol. 1998;49(4):436–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Bobek-Billewicz B, Stasik-Pres G, Hebda A, Majchrzak K, Kaspera W, Jurkowski M. Anaplastic transformation of low-grade gliomas (WHO II) on magnetic resonance imaging. Folia Neuropathol. 2014;52(2):128–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Rees J, Watt H, Jäger HR, Benton C, Tozer D, Tofts P, Waldman A. Volumes and growth rates of untreated adult low-grade gliomas indicate risk of early malignant transformation. Eur J Radiol. 2009;72(1):54–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Brasil Caseiras G, Ciccarelli O, Altmann DR, Benton CE, Tozer DJ, Tofts PS, et al. Low-grade gliomas: six-month tumor growth predicts patient outcome better than admission tumor volume, relative cerebral blood volume, and apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology. 2009;253(2):505–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Hathout L, Pope WB, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Cloughesy TF, Ellingson BM. Radial expansion rates and tumor growth kinetics predict malignant transformation in contrast-enhancing low-grade diffuse astrocytoma. CNS Oncol. 2015;4(4):247–56.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  104. Smits M, van den Bent MJ. Imaging correlates of adult glioma genotypes. Radiology. 2017;284(2):316–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Danchaivijitr N, Waldman AD, Tozer DJ, Benton CE, Brasil Caseiras G, Tofts PS, et al. Low-grade gliomas: do changes in rCBV measurements at longitudinal perfusion-weighted MR imaging predict malignant transformation? Radiology. 2008;247(1):170–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Law M, Young RJ, Babb JS, Peccerelli N, Chheang S, Gruber ML, 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(2):490–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Maia AC Jr, Malheiros SM, da Rocha AJ, da Silva CJ, Gabbai AA, Ferraz FA, 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(4):777–83.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Chen X, Jiang J, Shen N, Zhao L, Zhang J, Qin Y, et al. Stretched-exponential model diffusion-weighted imaging as a potential imaging marker in preoperative grading and assessment of proliferative activity of gliomas. Am J Transl Res. 2018;10(8):2659–68.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  109. Bulik M, Jancalek R, Vanicek J, Skoch A, Mechl M. Potential of MR spectroscopy for assessment of glioma grading. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013;115(2):146–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Freitag MT, Maier-Hein KH, Binczyk F, Laun FB, Weber C, Bonekamp D, et al. Early detection of malignant transformation in resected who II low-grade glioma using diffusion tensor-derived quantitative measures. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):e0164679.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Yin H, Parmar HA, Yeo TT, Tan SH, Lim CCT. Malignant transformation of oligodendroglioma: MR spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted MR imaging features. Eur J Radiol Extra. 2004;49(1):1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Jalbert LE, Neill E, Phillips JJ, Lupo JM, Olson MP, Molinaro AM, et al. Magnetic resonance analysis of malignant transformation in recurrent glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2016;18(8):1169–79.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Villanueva-Meyer JE, Wood MD, Choi BS, Mabray MC, Butowski NA, Tihan T, et al. MRI features and IDH mutational status of grade II diffuse gliomas: impact on diagnosis and prognosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210(3):621–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Choi C, Ganji SK, DeBerardinis RJ, Hatanpaa KJ, Rakheja D, Kovacs Z, et al. 2-Hydroxyglutarate detection by magnetic resonance spectroscopy in IDH-mutated patients with gliomas. Nat Med. 2012;18(4):624–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. Megyesi JF, Kachur E, Lee DH, Zlatescu MC, Betensky RA, Forsyth PA, et al. Imaging correlates of molecular signatures in oligodendrogliomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10(13):4303–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Patel SH, Poisson LM, Brat DJ, Zhou Y, Cooper L, Snuderl M, 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(20):6078–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Broen MPG, Smits M, Wijnenga MMJ, Dubbink HJ, Anten MHME, Schijns OEMG, 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(10):1393–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Zlatescu MC, TehraniYazdi A, Sasaki H, Megyesi JF, Betensky RA, Louis DN, et al. Tumor location and growth pattern correlate with genetic signature in oligodendroglial neoplasms. Cancer Res. 2001;61(18):6713–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Tozer DJ, Jäger HR, Danchaivijitr N, Benton CE, Tofts PS, Rees JH, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient histograms may predict low-grade glioma subtype. NMR Biomed. 2007;20(1):49–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Dowling C, Bollen AW, Noworolski SM, McDermott MW, Barbaro NM, Day MR, et al. Preoperative proton MR spectroscopic imaging of brain tumors: correlation with histopathologic analysis of resection specimens. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22(4):604–12.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Grech-Sollars M, Vaqas B, Thompson G, Barwick T, Honeyfield L, O'Neill K, Waldman AD. An MRS- and PET-guided biopsy tool for intraoperative neuronavigational systems. J Neurosurg. 2017;127(4):812–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Grech-Sollars M, Ordidge KL, Vaqas B, Davies C, Vaja V, Honeyfield L, et al. Imaging and tissue biomarkers of choline metabolism in diffuse adult glioma: 18F-fluoromethylcholine PET/CT, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and choline kinase α. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(12):1969.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Fathi Kazerooni A, Nabil M, Zeinali Zadeh M, Firouznia K, Azmoudeh-Ardalan F, Frangi AF, et al. Characterization of active and infiltrative tumorous subregions from normal tissue in brain gliomas using multiparametric MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;48(4):938–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Keil VC, Pintea B, Gielen GH, Greschus S, Fimmers R, Gieseke J, et al. Biopsy targeting with dynamic contrast-enhanced versus standard neuronavigation MRI in glioma: a prospective double-blinded evaluation of selection benefits. J Neurooncol. 2017;133(1):155–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Einstein DB, Wessels B, Bangert B, Fu P, Nelson AD, Cohen M, et al. Phase II trial of radiosurgery to magnetic resonance spectroscopy-defined high-risk tumor volumes in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84(3):668–74.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  126. Zhang J, Zhuang DX, Yao CJ, Lin CP, Wang TL, Qin ZY, et al. Metabolic approach for tumor delineation in glioma surgery: 3D MR spectroscopy image-guided resection. J Neurosurg. 2016;124(6):1585–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Cordova JS, Shu HK, Liang Z, Gurbani SS, Cooper LA, Holder CA, et al. Whole-brain spectroscopic MRI biomarkers identify infiltrating margins in glioblastoma patients. Neuro Oncol. 2016;18(8):1180–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  128. Jellison BJ, Field AS, Medow J, Lazar M, Salamat MS, Alexander AL. Diffusion tensor imaging of cerebral white matter: a pictorial review of physics, fiber tract anatomy, and tumor imaging patterns. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004;25(3):356–69.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  129. Chiang IC, Kuo YT, Lu CY, Yeung KW, Lin WC, Sheu FO, Liu GC. Distinction between high-grade gliomas and solitary metastases using peritumoral 3-T magnetic resonance spectroscopy, diffusion, and perfusion imagings. Neuroradiology. 2004;46(8):619–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Jena R, Price SJ, Baker C, Jefferies SJ, Pickard JD, Gillard JH, Burnet NG. Diffusion tensor imaging: possible implications for radiotherapy treatment planning of patients with high-grade glioma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005;17(8):581–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC Jr, Cairncross JG. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8(7):1277–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA, Cloughesy TF, Sorensen AG, Galanis E, et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(11):1963–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Huang RY, Rahman R, Ballman KV, Felten SJ, Anderson SK, Ellingson BM, et al. The impact of T2/FLAIR evaluation per RANO criteria on response assessment of recurrent glioblastoma patients treated with bevacizumab. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(3):575–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Kruser TJ, Mehta MP, Robins HI. Pseudoprogression after glioma therapy: a comprehensive review. Expert Rev Neurother. 2013;13(4):389–403.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Pope WB, Kim HJ, Huo J, Alger J, Brown MS, Gjertson D, et al. Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: ADC histogram analysis predicts response to bevacizumab treatment. Radiology. 2009;252(1):182–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Moffat BA, Chenevert TL, Meyer CR, McKeever PE, Hall DE, Hoff BA, et al. The functional diffusion map: an imaging biomarker for the early prediction of cancer treatment outcome. Neoplasia. 2006;8(4):259–67.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  137. Chenevert TL, Ross BD. Diffusion imaging for therapy response assessment of brain tumor. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2009;19(4):559–71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  138. Ellingson BM, Malkin MG, Rand SD, Connelly JM, Quinsey C, LaViolette PS, et al. Validation of functional diffusion maps (fDMs) as a biomarker for human glioma cellularity. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31(3):538–48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  139. Hamstra DA, GalbĂ¡n CJ, Meyer CR, Johnson TD, Sundgren PC, Tsien C, et al. Functional diffusion map as an early imaging biomarker for high-grade glioma: correlation with conventional radiologic response and overall survival. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(20):3387–94.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  140. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Zaw T, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Harris R, et al. Functional diffusion maps (fDMs) evaluated before and after radiochemotherapy predict progression-free and overall survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol. 2012;14(3):333–43.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  141. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Mischel PS, Nghiemphu PL, Lalezari S, et al. Graded functional diffusion map-defined characteristics of apparent diffusion coefficients predict overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. Neuro Oncol. 2011;13(10):1151–61.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  142. Chang W, Pope WB, Harris RJ, Hardy AJ, Leu K, Mody RR, et al. Diffusion MR characteristics following concurrent radiochemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Tomography. 2015;1(1):37–43.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  143. Hirai T, Murakami R, Nakamura H, Kitajima M, Fukuoka H, Sasao A, et al. Prognostic value of perfusion MR imaging of high-grade astrocytomas: long-term follow-up study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29(8):1505–10.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  144. Sawlani RN, Raizer J, Horowitz SW, Shin W, Grimm SA, Chandler JP, et al. Glioblastoma: a method for predicting response to antiangiogenic chemotherapy by using MR perfusion imaging—pilot study. Radiology. 2010;255(2):622–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  145. Schmainda KM, Prah M, Connelly J, Rand SD, Hoffman RG, Mueller W, et al. Dynamic-susceptibility contrast agent MRI measures of relative cerebral blood volume predict response to bevacizumab in recurrent high-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol. 2014;16(6):880–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  146. Kickingereder P, Radbruch A, Burth S, Wick A, Heiland S, Schlemmer HP, et al. MR perfusion-derived hemodynamic parametric response mapping of bevacizumab efficacy in recurrent glioblastoma. Radiology. 2016;279(2):542–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  147. Sorensen AG, Batchelor TT, Wen PY, Zhang WT, Jain RK. Response criteria for glioma. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008;5(11):634–44.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  148. Tsien C, GalbĂ¡n CJ, Chenevert TL, Johnson TD, Hamstra DA, Sundgren PC, et al. Parametric response map as an imaging biomarker to distinguish progression from pseudoprogression in high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(13):2293–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  149. Castellano A, Falini A. Progress in neuro-imaging of brain tumors. Curr Opin Oncol. 2016;28(6):484–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  150. Kim M, Kim HS. Emerging techniques in brain tumor imaging: what radiologists need to know. Korean J Radiol. 2016;17(5):598–619.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  151. Choi H, Paeng JC, Cheon GJ, Park CK, Choi SH, Min HS, et al. Correlation of 11C-methionine PET and diffusion-weighted MRI: is there a complementary diagnostic role for gliomas? Nucl Med Commun. 2014;35(7):720–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. Hein PA, Eskey CJ, Dunn JF, Hug EB. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the follow-up of treated high-grade gliomas: tumor recurrence versus radiation injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004;25(2):201–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  153. Xu JL, Li YL, Lian JM, Dou SW, Yan FS, Wu H, Shi DP. Distinction between postoperative recurrent glioma and radiation injury using MR diffusion tensor imaging. Neuroradiology. 2010;52(12):1193–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Asao C, Korogi Y, Kitajima M, Hirai T, Baba Y, Makino K, Kochi M, Morishita S, Yamashita Y. Diffusion-weighted imaging of radiation-induced brain injury for differentiation from tumor recurrence. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26(6):1455–60.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  155. Verma N, Cowperthwaite MC, Burnett MG, Markey MK. Differentiating tumor recurrence from treatment necrosis: a review of neuro-oncologic imaging strategies. Neuro Oncol. 2013;15(5):515–34.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  156. Hu LS, Eschbacher JM, Heiserman JE, Dueck AC, Shapiro WR, Liu S, et al. Reevaluating the imaging definition of tumor progression: perfusion MRI quantifies recurrent glioblastoma tumor fraction, pseudoprogression, and radiation necrosis to predict survival. Neuro Oncol. 2012;14(7):919–30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  157. Alcaide-Leon P, Luks TL, Lafontaine M, Lupo JM, Okada H, Clarke JL, Villanueva-Meyer JE. Treatment-induced lesions in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy and heat-shock protein vaccine therapy. J Neurooncol. 2020;146(1):71–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  158. Song YS, Choi SH, Park CK, Yi KS, Lee WJ, Yun TJ, et al. True progression versus pseudoprogression in the treatment of glioblastomas: a comparison study of normalized cerebral blood volume and apparent diffusion coefficient by histogram analysis. Korean J Radiol. 2013;14(4):662–72.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  159. Chu HH, Choi SH, Ryoo I, Kim SC, Yeom JA, Shin H, et al. Differentiation of true progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma treated with radiation therapy and concomitant temozolomide: comparison study of standard and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging. Radiology. 2013;269(3):831–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. Kang Y, Choi SH, Kim YJ, Kim KG, Sohn CH, Kim JH, Yun TJ, Chang KH. Gliomas: histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient maps with standard- or high-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging—correlation with tumor grade. Radiology. 2011;261(3):882–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. Kitahara S, Nakasu S, Murata K, Sho K, Ito R. Evaluation of treatment-induced cerebral white matter injury by using diffusion-tensor MR imaging: initial experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26(9):2200–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  162. Witwer BP, Moftakhar R, Hasan KM, Deshmukh P, Haughton V, Field A, et al. Diffusion-tensor imaging of white matter tracts in patients with cerebral neoplasm. J Neurosurg. 2002;97(3):568–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Kashimura H, Inoue T, Beppu T, Ogasawara K, Ogawa A. Diffusion tensor imaging for differentiation of recurrent brain tumor and radiation necrosis after radiotherapy—three case reports. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2007;109(1):106–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. Mangla R, Singh G, Ziegelitz D, Milano MT, Korones DN, Zhong J, Ekholm SE. Changes in relative cerebral blood volume 1 month after radiation-temozolomide therapy can help predict overall survival in patients with glioblastoma. Radiology. 2010;256(2):575–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  165. Larsen VA, Simonsen HJ, Law I, Larsson HB, Hansen AE. Evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MRI in the differentiation of tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis. Neuroradiology. 2013;55(3):361–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  166. Blasel S, Zagorcic A, Jurcoane A, Bähr O, Wagner M, Harter PN, Hattingen E. Perfusion MRI in the evaluation of suspected glioblastoma recurrence. J Neuroimaging. 2016;26(1):116–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  167. Boxerman JL, Schmainda KM, Weisskoff RM. Relative cerebral blood volume maps corrected for contrast agent extravasation significantly correlate with glioma tumor grade, whereas uncorrected maps do not. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27(4):859–67.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  168. Suh CH, Kim HS, Jung SC, Choi CG, Kim SJ. Multiparametric MRI as a potential surrogate endpoint for decision-making in early treatment response following concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(6):2628–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Elias AE, Carlos RC, Smith EA, Frechtling D, George B, Maly P, Sundgren PC. MR spectroscopy using normalized and non-normalized metabolite ratios for differentiating recurrent brain tumor from radiation injury. Acad Radiol. 2011;18(9):1101–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Smith EA, Carlos RC, Junck LR, Tsien CI, Elias A, Sundgren PC. Developing a clinical decision model: MR spectroscopy to differentiate between recurrent tumor and radiation change in patients with new contrast-enhancing lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(2):W45–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  171. Zeng QS, Li CF, Zhang K, Liu H, Kang XS, Zhen JH. Multivoxel 3D proton MR spectroscopy in the distinction of recurrent glioma from radiation injury. J Neurooncol. 2007;84(1):63–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Shah AH, Snelling B, Bregy A, Patel PR, Tememe D, Bhatia R, Sklar E, Komotar RJ. Discriminating radiation necrosis from tumor progression in gliomas: a systematic review what is the best imaging modality? J Neurooncol. 2013;112(2):141–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. Fink JR, Carr RB, Matsusue E, Iyer RS, Rockhill JK, Haynor DR, Maravilla KR. Comparison of 3 Tesla proton MR spectroscopy, MR perfusion and MR diffusion for distinguishing glioma recurrence from posttreatment effects. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35(1):56–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  174. Hyare H, Thust S, Rees J. Advanced MRI techniques in the monitoring of treatment of gliomas. Curr Treat Options Neurol. 2017;19(3):11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  175. Hygino da Cruz LC Jr, Rodriguez I, Domingues RC, Gasparetto EL, Sorensen AG. Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse: imaging challenges in the assessment of posttreatment glioma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(11):1978–85.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  176. Boxerman JL, Zhang Z, Safriel Y, Larvie M, Snyder BS, Jain R, Chi TL, Sorensen AG, Gilbert MR, Barboriak DP. Early post-bevacizumab progression on contrast-enhanced MRI as a prognostic marker for overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma: results from the ACRIN 6677/RTOG 0625 Central Reader Study. Neuro Oncol. 2013;15(7):945–54.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  177. Schmainda KM, Zhang Z, Prah M, Snyder BS, Gilbert MR, Sorensen AG, Barboriak DP, Boxerman JL. Dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI measures of relative cerebral blood volume as a prognostic marker for overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma: results from the ACRIN 6677/RTOG 0625 multicenter trial. Neuro Oncol. 2015;17(8):1148–56.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  178. Artzi M, Blumenthal DT, Bokstein F, Nadav G, Liberman G, Aizenstein O, Ben Bashat D. Classification of tumor area using combined DCE and DSC MRI in patients with glioblastoma. J Neurooncol. 2015;121(2):349–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  179. Artzi M, Bokstein F, Blumenthal DT, Aizenstein O, Liberman G, Corn BW, Ben Bashat D. Differentiation between vasogenic-edema versus tumor-infiltrative area in patients with glioblastoma during bevacizumab therapy: a longitudinal MRI study. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(7):1250–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  180. Akbari H, Macyszyn L, Da X, Wolf RL, Bilello M, Verma R, O'Rourke DM, Davatzikos C. Pattern analysis of dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging demonstrates peritumoral tissue heterogeneity. Radiology. 2014;273(2):502–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Gerstner ER, Chen PJ, Wen PY, Jain RK, Batchelor TT, Sorensen G. Infiltrative patterns of glioblastoma spread detected via diffusion MRI after treatment with cediranib. Neuro Oncol. 2010;12(5):466–72.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  182. Radbruch A, Lutz K, Wiestler B, Bäumer P, Heiland S, Wick W, Bendszus M. Relevance of T2 signal changes in the assessment of progression of glioblastoma according to the response assessment in neurooncology criteria. Neuro Oncol. 2012;14(2):222–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  183. Gupta A, Young RJ, Karimi S, Sood S, Zhang Z, Mo Q, Gutin PH, Holodny AI, Lassman AB. Isolated diffusion restriction precedes the development of enhancing tumor in a subset of patients with glioblastoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(7):1301–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  184. Mong S, Ellingson BM, Nghiemphu PL, Kim HJ, Mirsadraei L, Lai A, Yong W, Zaw TM, Cloughesy TF, Pope WB. Persistent diffusion-restricted lesions in bevacizumab-treated malignant gliomas are associated with improved survival compared with matched controls. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(9):1763–70.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  185. Nguyen HS, Milbach N, Hurrell SL, Cochran E, Connelly J, Bovi JA, et al. Progressing bevacizumab-induced diffusion restriction is associated with coagulative necrosis surrounded by viable tumor and decreased overall survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016;37(12):2201–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  186. Okada H, Weller M, Huang R, Finocchiaro G, Gilbert MR, Wick W, et al. Immunotherapy response assessment in neuro-oncology: a report of the RANO working group. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(15):e534–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  187. Aquino D, Gioppo A, Finocchiaro G, Bruzzone MG, Cuccarini V. MRI in glioma immunotherapy: evidence, pitfalls, and perspectives. J Immunol Res. 2017;2017:5813951.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK

    Shah Islam

  2. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Melanie A. Morrison

  3. Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK

    Melanie A. Morrison

  4. Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Adam D. Waldman

Authors
  1. Shah Islam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melanie A. Morrison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adam D. Waldman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam D. Waldman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Neuroradiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Scott H. Faro

  2. Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Feroze B. Mohamed

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Islam, S., Morrison, M.A., Waldman, A.D. (2023). Quantitative and Physiological Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Glioma. In: Faro, S.H., Mohamed, F.B. (eds) Functional Neuroradiology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10909-6_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10909-6_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-10908-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-10909-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation