Automated Processing of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI: Correlation of Advanced Pharmacokinetic Metrics with Tumor Grade in Pediatric Brain Tumors

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Ostrom QT,
   3. Gittleman H,
   4. Fulop J, et al

   . CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2008–2012. Neuro Oncol 2015;17(suppl 4):iv1–iv62 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov189 pmid:26511214

   FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   2. Pollack IF

   . Multidisciplinary management of childhood brain tumors: a review of outcomes, recent advances, and challenges. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2011;8:135–48 doi:10.3171/2011.5.PEDS1178 pmid:21806354

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Arevalo-Perez J,
   3. Kebede AA,
   4. Peck KK, et al

   . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in low-grade versus anaplastic oligodendrogliomas. J Neuroimaging 2016;26:366–71 doi:10.1111/jon.12320 pmid:26707628

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Zhao J,
   3. Yang ZY,
   4. Luo BN, et al

   . Quantitative evaluation of diffusion and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR in tumor parenchyma and peritumoral area for distinction of brain tumors. PLoS One 2015;10:e0138573 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138573 pmid:26384329

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Zhang N,
   3. Zhang L,
   4. Qiu B, et al

   . Correlation of volume transfer coefficient Ktrans with histopathologic grades of gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:355–63 doi:10.1002/jmri.23675 pmid:22581762

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Thomas AA,
   3. Arevalo-Perez J,
   4. Kaley T, et al

   . Dynamic contrast enhanced T1 MRI perfusion differentiates pseudoprogression from recurrent glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 2015;125:183–90 doi:10.1007/s11060-015-1893-z pmid:26275367

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Schmainda KM,
   3. Prah M,
   4. Connelly J, 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;16:880–88 doi:10.1093/neuonc/not216 pmid:24431219

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Harris RJ,
   3. Cloughesy TF,
   4. Hardy AJ, et al

   . MRI perfusion measurements calculated using advanced deconvolution techniques predict survival in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. J Neurooncol 2015;122:497–505 doi:10.1007/s11060-015-1755-8 pmid:25773062

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Arevalo-Perez J,
   3. Thomas AA,
   4. Kaley T, et al

   . T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a noninvasive biomarker of epidermal growth factor receptor vIII status. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:2256–61 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4484 pmid:26338913

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    2. Jain R,
    3. Poisson LM,
    4. Gutman D, et al

    . Outcome prediction in patients with glioblastoma by using imaging, clinical, and genomic biomarkers: focus on the nonenhancing component of the tumor. Radiology 2014;272:484–93 doi:10.1148/radiol.14131691 pmid:24646147

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Pope WB

    . Predictive imaging marker of bevacizumab efficacy: perfusion MRI. Neuro Oncol 2015;17:1046–47 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov067 pmid:25910842

    FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    2. Lam S,
    3. Lin Y,
    4. Warnke PC

    . Permeability imaging in pediatric brain tumors. Transl Pediatr 2014;3:218–28 doi:10.3978/j.issn.2224-4336.2014.07.01 pmid:26835339

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Gururangan S,
    3. Fangusaro J,
    4. Poussaint TY, et al

    . Efficacy of bevacizumab plus irinotecan in children with recurrent low-grade gliomas: a Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium study. Neuro Oncol 2014;16:310–17 doi:10.1093/neuonc/not154 pmid:24311632

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    2. Zukotynski KA,
    3. Fahey FH,
    4. Vajapeyam S, et al

    . Exploratory evaluation of MR permeability with 18F-FDG PET mapping in pediatric brain tumors: a report from the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium. J Nucl Med 2013;54:1237–43 doi:10.2967/jnumed.112.115782 pmid:23801675

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    2. Thompson EM,
    3. Guillaume DJ,
    4. Dosa E, et al

    . Dual contrast perfusion MRI in a single imaging session for assessment of pediatric brain tumors. J Neurooncol 2012;109:105–14 doi:10.1007/s11060-012-0872-x pmid:22528798

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Gururangan S,
    3. Fangusaro J,
    4. Young Poussaint T, et al

    . Lack of efficacy of bevacizumab + irinotecan in cases of pediatric recurrent ependymoma: a Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium study. Neuro Oncol 2012;14:1404–12 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos213 pmid:23019233

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    2. Gururangan S,
    3. Chi SN,
    4. Young Poussaint T, et al

    . Lack of efficacy of bevacizumab plus irinotecan in children with recurrent malignant glioma and diffuse brainstem glioma: a Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium study. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3069–75 doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.26.8789 pmid:20479404

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    2. Liu HL,
    3. Chang TT,
    4. Yan FX, et al

    . Assessment of vessel permeability by combining dynamic contrast-enhanced and arterial spin labeling MRI. NMR Biomed 2015;28:642–49 doi:10.1002/nbm.3297 pmid:25880892

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Koob M,
    3. Girard N,
    4. Ghattas B, et al

    . The diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI to determine pediatric brain tumor grades and types. J Neurooncol 2016;127:345–53 doi:10.1007/s11060-015-2042-4 pmid:26732081

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Law M,
    3. Yang S,
    4. Wang H, et al

    . Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:1989–98 pmid:14625221

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    2. Fram EK,
    3. Herfkens RJ,
    4. Johnson GA, et al

    . Rapid calculation of T1 using variable flip angle gradient refocused imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1987;5:201–08 doi:10.1016/0730-725X(87)90021-X pmid:3626789

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    2. Tofts PS

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

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    2. Weinmann HJ,
    3. Laniado M,
    4. Mützel W

    . Pharmacokinetics of GdDTPA/dimeglumine after intravenous injection into healthy volunteers. Physiol Chem Phys Med NMR 1984;16:167–72 pmid:6505043

    PubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    2. Abe T,
    3. Mizobuchi Y,
    4. Nakajima K, et al

    . Diagnosis of brain tumors using dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging with a short acquisition time. Springerplus 2015;4:88 doi:10.1186/s40064-015-0861-6 pmid:25793147

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Li X,
    3. Zhu Y,
    4. Kang H, et al

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

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Choi HS,
    3. Kim AH,
    4. Ahn SS, et al

    . Glioma grading capability: comparisons among parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and ADC value on DWI. Korean J Radiol 2013;14:487–92 doi:10.3348/kjr.2013.14.3.487 pmid:23690718

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Ho CY,
    3. Cardinal JS,
    4. Kamer AP, et al

    . Relative cerebral blood volume from dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion in the grading of pediatric primary brain tumors. Neuroradiology 2015;57:299–306 doi:10.1007/s00234-014-1478-0 pmid:25504266

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Ho CY,
    3. Cardinal JS,
    4. Kamer AP, et al

    . Contrast leakage patterns from dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MRI in the grading of primary pediatric brain tumors. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:544–51 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4559 pmid:26564438

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    2. Yeom KW,
    3. Mitchell LA,
    4. Lober RM, et al

    . Arterial spin-labeled perfusion of pediatric brain tumors. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:395–401 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3670 pmid:23907239

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    2. Roberts HC,
    3. Roberts TPL,
    4. Ley S, et al

    . Quantitative estimation of microvascular permeability in human brain tumors: correlation of dynamic Gd-DTPA–enhanced MR imaging with histopathologic grading. Acad Radiol 2002;9:S151–55 doi:10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80425-7 pmid:12019855

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Mills SJ,
    3. Patankar TA,
    4. Haroon HA, et al

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

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    2. Patankar TF,
    3. Haroon HA,
    4. Mills SJ, et al

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

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    2. Cao Y,
    3. Nagesh V,
    4. Hamstra D, et al

    . The extent and severity of vascular leakage as evidence of tumor aggressiveness in high-grade gliomas. Cancer Res 2006;66:8912–17 doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-4328 pmid:16951209

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    2. Mills SJ,
    3. Soh C,
    4. Rose CJ, et al

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

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    2. Larsson C,
    3. Kleppesto M,
    4. Grothe I, et al

    . T1 in high-grade glioma and the influence of different measurement strategies on parameter estimations in DCE-MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42:97–104 doi:10.1002/jmri.24772 pmid:25350816

    CrossRefPubMed