...
首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Neuroradiology >Distinguishing Recurrent Primary Brain Tumor from Radiation Injury: A Preliminary Study Using a Susceptibility-Weighted MR Imaging-Guided Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Analysis Strategy
【24h】

Distinguishing Recurrent Primary Brain Tumor from Radiation Injury: A Preliminary Study Using a Susceptibility-Weighted MR Imaging-Guided Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Analysis Strategy

机译:区分复发性原发性脑肿瘤与放射损伤:使用磁化加权MR成像引导的表观扩散系数分析策略的初步研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The accurate delineation of tumor recurrence presents a significant problem in neuro-oncology. Our aim was to improve the identification of brain tumor recurrence from chemoradiation injury by using CE-SWI, a technique that provides improved visualization of the heterogeneous patterns of brain tumor pathology, to guide the analysis of ADC measures within the peritumoral territory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen patients who were being treated for high-grade glial neoplasms took part in the study. All patients presented with new enhancing lesions on follow-up CE-T1. Recurrence or chemoradiation injury was confirmed from either histologic analysis or extensive clinical follow-up. Regions of enhancement on registered CE-SWI and CE-T1 images were extracted in a semiautomated fashion and transferred to coregistered ADC maps. Significant differences in ADC measures defined within the enhancement volumes on serial MR images were analyzed by using a nonparametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov approach and correlated with clinical follow-up diagnoses. RESULTS: Analysis of the serial data revealed that patients with a diagnosis of tumor recurrence had significantly reduced ADC measures within the enhancement volume delineated on CE-SWI. In contrast, patients with SD had significantly elevated ADC within the CE-SWI enhancement volume. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of an increase in enhancement volume delineated on serial CE-SWI maps, along with a concomitant reduction in ADC within this volume for patients with recurrent tumor, provide support for such an approach to be used to assist in follow-up patient management strategies. Abbreviations: ADC, apparent diffusion coefficient • BBB, blood-brain barrier • CE-SWI, contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted imaging • CE-T1, contrast-enhanced T1-weighted imaging • FMRIB, Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain • GBM, glioblastoma multiforme • MRI, MR imaging • No E, no constant enhancement • Pseudo, evidence of a secondary pseudoprogressive lesion • RT, recurrent tumor • SD, stable disease • SWI, susceptibility-weighted imaging • Vol, volume • WHO, World Health Organization Advances in understanding cancer cell proliferation, combined with the introduction of new drugs, improvement in the delivery of radiation therapy, and neurosurgical techniques, now make it possible for primary brain tumors to be treated more rationally. Despite these advances, the 1-year mortality rate for high-grade tumors is approximately 80%. A factor contributing to poor outcomes is the limitation of current neuroimaging strategies to reliably identify tumor recurrence from chemoradiation therapy–induced injury. This problem is further exacerbated by the introduction of adjuvant temozolomide radiation therapy, the new standard of care for patients with glioblastoma multiforme, which can result in formation of asymptomatic pseudoprogressive lesions and increased necrosis within the peritumoral territory.1 Such treatment-related pathologic changes impede accurate identification of potential tumor recurrence, hindering optimized planning of appropriately targeted primary or salvage therapies. Diffusion–weighted MR imaging by using quantitative summary measures such as the ADC, which probes altered water mobility in brain tissue, has shown potential for distinguishing tumor regrowth from radiation injury.2–4 Although there is overlap in the reported findings regarding reduced ADC measures associated with increased cellularity and recurrent tumor,2,3 overall these studies highlight the fundamental complexity of attempting to relate a single ADC measure to the dynamically evolving pathologic processes present at various stages after treatment. Furthermore, the evaluation of ADC values is dependent on the sampling method—for example, whether vascular components and regions of necrosis are included or excluded from the analysis of the peritumoral territory.5 This is a confounding factor because ADC measures are often evaluated from regions of enhancement present on post-CE-T1, which has a poor specificity for distinguishing such pathologic features. Recently, SWI has enabled visualization of the heterogeneous patterns of tissue pathology present within brain tumors, which is not possible by using conventional CE-T1.6–8 Moreover, CE-SWI has shown improved conspicuity of susceptibility effects, providing clinically useful information about altered tumor microvascularity, the degree of intratumoral necrosis, and the presence of subtle defects of the BBB within the surrounding parenchymal tissue.9,10 The inherent ability of CE-SWI to distinguish such pathologic features provides a novel mechanism for evaluating ADC measures within parenchymal tissue with abnormal BBB function. Such regions are of considerable interest because recurrent tumor often occurs within this peritumoral territory. In this study, we investigated whether serial ADC measures from such regions would provide more accurate identification of the evolutionary pathologic processes associated with recurrent tumor or chemoradiation injury. To explore this hypothesis, we measured ADC profiles within the enhancing regions delineated on both CE-T1 and CE-SWI maps acquired from patients who were being treated for high-grade primary brain tumors, by using a semiautomated segmentation strategy. We targeted patients who presented with new enhancing lesions as part of their continued assessment. The accuracy of CE-SWI–guided ADC measures for detecting recurrent tumor was validated with either open biopsy or follow-up imaging and clinical assessment. Materials and Methods Patients Seventeen patients (8 men, 9 women) who were being treated for high-grade (WHO grade III or IV) glial neoplasms took part in the study. The institutional review board approved the study, and informed consent was obtained from each participant. All patients had previously undergone surgical resection with chemoradiotherapy and had presented with new enhancing lesions on follow-up CE-T1. When possible, tumor recurrence was confirmed from histologic analysis (n = 5, with 1 patient deceased). Where biopsy was not possible, tumor recurrence was defined as a steady increase in CE-T1 enhancement and mass effect despite steroid therapy, in combination with deteriorating neurologic symptoms. Nonrecurrence was defined on imaging as stable or resolving regions of enhancement for at least 6 months, accompanied by neurologic improvement during the follow-up period.2,3 Because we cannot absolutely confirm nonrecurrence without histologic findings, in this study, we use the terminology SD for these patients. Patients in the RT group were receiving adjuvant temozolomide therapy before the acquisition of the imaging data. One patient (patient 9) received antiangiogenic treatment with bevacizumab. The time duration between completion of therapy and data acquisition is given in Table 1. Biopsy samples were obtained after the acquisition of imaging data to assist in new treatment-planning strategies for these patients. View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 1: Patient demographics, diagnosis, and clinical course MR Imaging All MR imaging examinations were performed by using either a 1.5T Avanto or 3T Magnetom Trio scanner (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany), with a 12-channel-array head coil. In most cases, patients underwent their serial scanning with the same imaging platform. Along with a number of conventional sequences, T1-weighted images were acquired before and after intravenous administration of gadopentetate dimeglumine (Magnevist, Schering, Berlin, Germany) by using the following parameters: TR/TE, 500/11 and 600/7.4 ms for 1.5 and 3T, respectively, with an image resolution of 0.45 x 0.45 x 5 mm. The SWI data were acquired by using a 3D fully velocity-compensated (gradient moment nulling in all 3 orthogonal directions) gradient-echo sequence with the following sequence parameters: TR/TE, 49/40 and 27/20 ms for 1.5 and 3T scanners, respectively. The image resolution was 1.1 x 0.9 x 2 mm. Diffusion-weighted images were acquired in the axial plane by using a spin-echo echo-planar sequence with diffusion gradient encoding in 3 orthogonal directions. The sequence parameters used were the following: TR/TE, 3900/84 and 4500/91 ms, respectively, for the 1.5 and 3T scanners, with 5 averages and a maximum b-value of 1000 s/mm2. The image resolution was 1.1 x 1.1 x 5 mm. The diffusion scan was acquired before administration of the contrast agent. Image Processing and Analysis A number of fully validated image-processing software tools from the University of Oxford FMRIB Centre software library (Version 4.0, http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/10years/brochure/page-4) were used in this study. To enable measurement of ADC values from hyperintense regions present on CE-T1 and CE-SWI maps, we first registered all serial images to the same image space. This registration was achieved by using the Linear Image Registration Tool11 by applying an affine transformation to ensure that all images (CE-T1 and ADC) were registered into the same image space and resolution as the CE-SWI map. To aid automated segmentation of the enhancement volume, we then removed the skull by using the FMRIB Brain-Extraction Tool.12 Extraction of the enhancement CE-T1 and CE-SWI volumes was achieved by using the Automated Segmentation Tool in FMRIB with a 3-class segmentation model. Any extracted enhancement regions on the CE-T1 and CE-SWI maps that were found to anatomically lie outside of the boundary of the hyperintense region visible on the corresponding fluid-attenuated inversion recovery images were manually edited. This procedure enabled generation of CE-T1 and CE-SWI enhancement masks, which more accurately represented tissue with perturbed BBB within the peritumoral territory. For each mask, possible exclusion of regions corresponding to paradoxical signal-intensity loss due to T2* effects that can result after administration of contrast agent was carefully assessed by the visual inspection of the CE phase maps.6 Hyperintense regions present on precontrast T1 images were manually removed from the extracted CE-T1 enhancement masks. The segmented masks that best fitted the hyperintense regions present on CE-T1 and CE-SWI maps were then directly transformed onto coregistered ADC images for evaluation, to enable statistical analysis of ADC values for all pixels within these enhancement masks with time. Because the ADC measures were not normally distributed within the enhancement masks, we used a nonparametric analytic approach with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to determine whether there was any significant difference in ADC measures contained within the enhancement masks between each serial imaging time point for each participant. For purposes of data tabulation, median ADC values were calculated for each enhancement mask. The difference between the CE-T1 and CE-SWI enhancement volumes was assessed by using a paired t test. Results Patient demographics and information describing initial diagnosis and clinical course are given in Table 1. Enhancement volumes derived from CE-T1 and CE-SWI maps, in addition to ADC summary measures, are presented in Table 2. When comparing the enhancement volumes, we found a significant reduction in the volume of the CE-SWI–derived mask compared with the CE-T1 mask for both time points (P = .002 and P = .004, respectively). Despite a difference in enhancement volume, compared for all patients, there was no significant difference in the median ADC values between the CE-T1 or CE-SWI enhancement masks. Representative images for a patient with recurrent tumor, showing a reduction in volume of the CE-SWI mask compared with the CE-T1 enhancement region, are given in Fig 1. In this example, hypointense regions visible on the CE-SWI map that reflect areas of necrosis and vascular structures10 anatomically correlate with hyperintense areas observed on the corresponding CE-T1. Measurement of ADC values from within the CE-T1 enhancement mask in this case would be elevated due to the presence of necrosis that would possibly mask subtle changes in ADC reflecting tumor regrowth or radiation injury. View this table: [in this window] [in a new window] Table 2: Lesion volumes and ADC measuresa View larger version (78K): [in this window] [in a new window] Fig 1. A–C, Representative images from a patient with recurrent GBM: CE-T1 (A), CE-SWI (B), and ADC maps (C). D–F, Automatically defined enhancement masks are overlaid on the corresponding maps seen in the top row. Note the regions of nonspecific BBB leakage within the CE-T1 mask, which correlate to areas of necrosis and vascular structures on the SWI maps (arrow). Of the 11 participants with clinical features associated with tumor recurrence, 10/11 had significantly reduced ADC measures within the CE-SWI enhancement mask. Five of 11 had biopsy-confirmed tumor regrowth. In comparison with the CE-SWI findings, 3/11 patients had significantly reduced ADC measures and 4/11 patients had significantly increased ADC within their respective CE-T1 enhancement masks. Figure 2 shows imaging data for a patient with recurrent tumor. There is a significant increase in enhancement volume depicted on the follow-up scans for both the CE-T1 and CE-SWI maps. The frequency plot derived from the CE-SWI enhancement mask shows a shift toward a reduction in ADC values with evolution of recurrent tumor pathology. In contrast, the CE-T1–derived frequency plot reveals a significant increase in ADC measures. Of the 10 tumor-recurrent patients with significantly reduced ADC measures, 7/10 patients had a significant increase in enhancement volumes of follow-up CE-T1 and CE-SWI scans. View larger version (48K): [in this window] [in a new window] Fig 2. Representative CE-T1 (A and D), CE-SWI (B and E), ADC maps (C and F), and ADC frequency plots for patient 14, with a biopsy-defined recurrent anaplastic oligoastrocytoma. The top frequency plot presents ADC values found within the CE-T1 enhancement mask (red), while the bottom plot shows ADC values contained within the CE-SWI mask (blue). Images on the top row correspond to the initial time point, while those on the bottom row show the follow-up scans. For the ADC frequency plots, the continuous line corresponds to data acquired at the initial time point, while the dashed line is from the follow-up data. These combined data highlight the correlation between an increase in enhancement volume (for both T1 and SWI) with a significant reduction in ADC value within the CE-SWI enhancement mask for recurrent tumor. Most interesting, there is an apparent increase in ADC within the CE-T1 enhancement mask, possibly reflecting the inclusion of necrosis within the ADC analysis. Of the 6 patients with clinical features most likely associated with chemoradiation injury (SD), 5/6 had significantly elevated ADC measures within the CE-SWI–enhancement mask. Two of these patients had an increase in the CE-SWI–derived enhancement region. In contrast, 4 patients presented with significantly increased ADC values within the CE-T1–defined enhancement mask. Frequency plots along with representative images for a patient with SD are shown in Fig 3. The CE-SWI-enhancement–derived frequency plot highlights a significant increase in the ADC measure after treatment for this patient compared with the CE-T1 enhancement region. Only 1 patient presented with a pattern of signal-intensity enhancement on CE-T1 with no detectable enhancement visible on the corresponding CE-SWI map at either of the follow-up time points. View larger version (34K): [in this window] [in a new window] Fig 3. Representative CE-T1 (A and D), CE-SWI (B and E), ADC maps (C and F), and ADC frequency graphs for patient 10 with SD most likely associated with radiation-chemotherapy–induced changes. The top frequency plot presents ADC values found within the CE-T1 enhancement mask (red), while the bottom plot shows ADC values contained within the CE-SWI mask (blue). Images on the top row correspond to the initial time point, while those on the bottom row show the follow-up scans. For the ADC frequency plots, the continuous line corresponds to data acquired at the initial time point, while the dashed line is from the follow-up data. For this patient, there is little change in enhancement volume between time points, but a significant increase in ADC values within the CE-SWI enhancement mask. Follow-up scans revealed no further increase in enhancement volume (data not shown). This pattern of change may represent radiation injury within the perilesional boundary. Discussion In this preliminary study, we report, for the first time, the use of CE-SWI to guide the assessment of ADC measures. Such a strategy enables evaluation of ADC indices within parenchymal tissue exhibiting enhancement after contrast administration, excluding regions that may anatomically correlate to vascular compartments containing blood products and areas of necrosis. In patients with high-grade primary brain tumors that present with new enhancing lesions, we found that an increase in CE-SWI enhancement volume along with a concomitant reduction in ADC within this region is a marker of tumor recurrence. This finding was consistent in 10 of 11 patients with either biopsy or clinical-imaging follow-up diagnosis of recurrent tumor. In contrast, all 6 patients with SD, most likely associated with a diagnosis of chemoradiation injury, had significantly elevated ADC measures with enhancing lesions on CE-SWI. CE-SWI maps were not used to stratify patients into recurrent or SD subgroups. This was achieved by using conventional MR imaging and clinical work-up procedures. The finding of a reduction in ADC measures in areas of tumor recurrence corroborates results from previous studies.2,3 Furthermore, a number of preclinical and clinical studies have reported a significant inverse correlation between ADC measures and tumor cellularity.13–16 Although a recent study found no relationship between ADC measures and cell attenuation on stereotactic biopsies, a significant correlation was found for microvessel attenuation, a surrogate marker for proliferating cellular activity.17 The study published by Sundgren et al4 reported an increase in ADC measures associated with tumor recurrence. This discrepancy may be explained by the longer follow-up period between identification of new enhancing lesions and the acquisition of imaging data (average of >20 months). At this duration, posttreatment enhancing lesions observed on CE-T1 MR imaging may contain regions of additional necrosis, which would elevate ADC measures. The use of a CE-SWI–guided ADC analysis has the potential to circumvent this confounding problem. However, 1 patient in our study (patient 9) who had biopsy-confirmed tumor recurrence had significantly increased ADC measures within the CE-SWI enhancement mask. The histology report for this patient revealed the presence of significant micronecrosis albeit with some infiltrating tumor cells. The finding of extensive micronecrosis may help explain the elevated ADC measures, but at this stage, we cannot speculate whether the ADC value would decrease on subsequent MR imaging. This finding also highlights the problem of dichotomizing patients into either RT or SD. In many cases, the peritumoral territory will contain mixed pathology (ie, both chemoradiation injury and possible recurrent tumor). However, in this preliminary study, with any evidence of infiltrating tumor cells within the histology sample, the patient was classified as having recurrent tumor. At this stage, we have not correlated ADC measures with the extent or number of proliferating tumor cells within the biopsied tissue. A wide range of ADC values was measured within the CE-SWI–derived enhancement mask that corresponded to tumor regrowth (960–1560 s/mm2). Such a finding is not surprising given the heterogeneous pathology associated with the various primary brain tumors included in this study and, most important, the variation in the scanning follow-up period between identification of a new enhancing lesion and data acquisition. For these reasons, including dichotomizing patients into either RT or SD, we think that a single threshold ADC value that can accurately distinguish recurrent tumor from radiation injury is unlikely and that more clinically useful information regarding treatment progression and outcome can be gained from serial MR imaging evaluations. We observed significant changes in CE-SWI–guided ADC measures within a 2-month monitoring period. Such a timeframe fits well with current practice regarding 2–3 monthly follow-up imagings posttreatment. There are a number of limitations associated with this study. The precise histologic correlate of increased signal intensity detected on postcontrast SWI is not yet well-defined. However, a number of preliminary studies with histologic reference by using SWI without contrast have reported the improved delineation of the tumor margins and detection of intratumoral venous vasculature and hemorrhage.6–10 Most important, a recent study reported improved conspicuity of susceptibility effects and image quality within the peritumoral territory by using CE-SWI, highlighting the clinical utility of this method for measuring contrast enhancement (ie, BBB leakage) and intralesional susceptibility effects (ie, necrosis) in the 1 imaging sequence.9 Such findings give support for the concept of measuring ADC values within enhancement regions on CE-SWI maps for monitoring pathologic changes within this territory. One patient with SD in our study (patient 7) presented with signal-intensity enhancement on CE-T1 MR imaging, without any regions of hyperintensity detectable on CE-SWI maps. Investigation of the corresponding phase image revealed no aliasing artifacts.6 On the CE-T1, the enhancement was constrained to the rim of the site of the initial tumor resection and was most likely associated with surgical injury to the endothelium of vessels within this region. Although the clinical manifestation of the CE-SWI finding is unclear, further work is required to fully understand the relationship between histology and signal-intensity enhancement on CE-SWI. We have used CE-SWI maps to identify regions of necrosis and parenchymal tissue with compromised BBB function. Regions of necrosis would elevate ADC measures and potentially mask pathologic changes associated with tumor regrowth. Using enhancement masks derived from CE-SWI maps may include some vascular regions also exhibiting signal-intensity enhancement. Currently, our approach does not differentiate this possibility. However, careful analysis of pre- and postcontrast SWI data would provide more accurate parenchymal masks. Other limitations are the small number of patients in this study, the difficulty of obtaining histologic confirmation of pathology for every case, and the difference in duration between diagnosis and time of follow-up imaging between the RT and SD patient groups. Patients with a potential diagnosis of chemoradiation injury do not routinely have follow-up biopsy procedures. Likewise, patients with possible recurrent tumor may have follow-up surgery; however, histologic results are not anatomically specific because they are often derived from large biopsy tissue samples containing mixed pathology. Clearly, additional studies are needed to confirm the use of CE-SWI–guided ADC measures for detecting recurrence–chemoradition injury, which include detailed stereotactic biopsy analysis. Conclusions In this preliminary study, we found evidence of a correlation between increased enhancement volumes on serial CE-SWI maps along with a concomitant reduction in ADC levels within the enhancement mask in patients with tumor recurrence compared with those presenting with SD.
机译:背景与目的:准确描述肿瘤复发是神经肿瘤学中的重要问题。我们的目的是通过使用 CE-SWI来改善对化学放射损伤脑肿瘤复发的鉴定,该技术可改善 异质性脑肿瘤病理学模式,以指导 在肿瘤周围区域内的ADC测量方法的分析。 材料和方法:十七名接受高级神经胶质治疗的患者 肿瘤参与了这项研究。所有患者在随访CE-T1时均出现 新的增强病变。从组织学分析或广泛的 临床随访中证实复发或化学放疗 受伤。以半自动方式提取已注册的CE-SWI 和CE-T1图像上的增强区域,然后将 转移到共同注册的ADC映射中。使用非参数Kolmogorov-Smirnov 方法分析了在串行 MR图像的增强体积内定义的ADC测量中的显着差异 ,并与临床随访相关结果:对串行数据的分析显示,诊断为 肿瘤复发的患者在 增强量范围内,ADC措施明显减少在CE-SWI上描述。相反,患有SD的患者 在CE-SWI增强 量内具有显着升高的ADC。 结论:增强量增加的发现被描述在连续的CE-SWI图上的 ,以及在此体积内同时减少的复发性肿瘤患者的 ADC,为这种方法提供了 支持 缩写:ADC,表观扩散系数•BBB,血脑屏障•CE-SWI,对比增强药敏性加权成像•CE-T1,对比增强的T1加权成像•FMRIB,脑功能磁共振成像•GBM,多形胶质母细胞瘤•MRI,MR成像•无E,无恒定增强•伪,二次伪进行性证据病变•RT,复发性肿瘤•SD,稳定疾病•SWI,药敏加权成像•体积,体积•世卫组织,世界卫生组织广告在理解癌细胞增殖方面取得了进展, 与新药的引入,放射治疗的递送 的改进以及神经外科技术的结合,现在使 尽管取得了这些进展,但高等级 肿瘤的1年死亡率约为80%。导致 不良结果的一个因素是当前神经影像学策略难以可靠地 识别化学放疗引起的 损伤引起的肿瘤复发。辅助性替莫唑胺放疗的引入 ,多形性胶质母细胞瘤患者的新护理标准 进一步加剧了这个问题,该结果可以 1 这种无症状的假性进展性病变的形成 并增加坏死。 1 与治疗有关的这种病理变化阻碍了准确的识别 潜在的肿瘤复发,阻碍了针对性的靶向或挽救性治疗方案的优化规划。 使用定量汇总 方法(例如探测脑组织中水流动性改变的ADC表现出了区分肿瘤 再生长和放射损伤的潜力。 2-4 报告的发现中重叠的 有关减少的ADC测量与 相关的增加的细胞数量和结果rrent肿瘤, 2,3 总的来说,这些 研究突显了试图将 与动态发展的病理学相关的单个ADC指标相关的基本复杂性。 处理在处理后的各个阶段存在。此外, ADC值的评估取决于采样方法,例如 例如,是否包括血管成分和坏死区域 5 的分析。 5 这是一个令人困惑的因素,因为ADC措施 通常是从CE-术后出现的增强区域进行评估的T1, 对于区分这种病理性 特征的特异性较差。 最近,SWI已启用异类 的可视化脑肿瘤内存在的组织病理学模式, 不能通过常规的CE-T1来使用。 6-8 此外, CE-SWI已显示出磁化效应的显着性,< sup> 提供有关肿瘤 微血管变化,肿瘤内坏死程度以及周围内BBB细微缺陷的存在的临床有用信息实质组织。 9,10 CE-SWI区分 此类病理特征的固有能力为评估 ADC提供了一种新颖的机制 由于复发性 肿瘤通常发生在该肿瘤周围区域,因此这些区域引起人们的广泛关注。 在本研究中,我们调查了来自 此类区域的串行ADC测量是否可以更准确地识别与复发 tum相关的 进化病理过程或化学辐射伤害。为了探索这一假设,我们在从 获得的患者的CE-T1和CE-SWI图上,在 描绘的增强区域内测量了ADC分布图通过使用 半自动分割策略对重度原发性脑肿瘤进行治疗。我们针对 出现新的增强病变的患者作为其持续 评估的一部分。 CE-SWI指导的ADC措施 用于检测复发性肿瘤的准确性已通过开放式 活检或随访影像学和临床评估得到验证。 材料和方法患者接受 高级(WHO III或IV级)神经胶质瘤治疗的17例患者(8例男性,9例女性)参加了该研究。机构审查委员会批准了这项研究, ,并从每位参与者获得了知情同意。所有 患者先前都曾接受过放化疗的手术切除 ,并在后续的CE-T1手术中出现了新的增强病变。 在可能的情况下,肿瘤会复发。从组织学 分析中得到证实(n = 5,死亡1例)。在 无法进行活检的情况下,肿瘤复发被定义为尽管进行类固醇治疗,但CE-T1增强和质量效应稳定增加 联合神经系统症状恶化。影像学上将非复发 定义为稳定或可解决的增强区域 至少6个月,并在随访期间伴有神经系统改善 。 2,3 因为没有组织学检查结果我们不能绝对地 确认非复发,所以在本研究中,我们对这些患者使用术语SD。 RT组的患者在 采集影像数据之前接受替莫唑胺辅助治疗。 1名患者(9名患者) 接受了贝伐单抗的抗血管生成治疗。表1中给出了治疗完成与数据采集之间的时间。表1采集了影像数据以协助进行治疗。这些患者的新治疗计划 策略。 查看此表:[在此窗口中] [在新窗口中]表1:患者的人口统计学,诊断和临床过程MR成像所有MR成像检查均使用带有12通道阵列头线圈的 1.5T Avanto或3T Magnetom Trio扫描仪(Siemens,Erlangen, 德国)进行。 。在大多数情况下, 患者使用相同的成像 平台进行连续扫描。连同许多常规序列,在静脉内施用<戊二酸二聚丁二胺(Magnevist,先灵,柏林,德国)之前和之后,获取了T1加权的 图像 通过使用以下参数:对于1.5和3T,TR / TE,500/11和600 / 7.4 ms分别为 0.45 x 0.45 x 5毫米通过使用3D 完全速度补偿(在所有3 正交方向上的梯度矩归零)梯度回波序列和以下 序列参数:分别用于1.5和3T 扫描仪的TR / TE,49/40和27/20 ms。图像分辨率为1.1 x 0.9 x 2 mm。通过使用在3个正交方向上具有扩散梯度 编码的自旋回波平面序列在轴平面 中获取扩散加权图像。所使用的序列参数 分别为:TR / TE,3900/84和4500/91 ms,1.5和3T扫描仪的 ,具有5个平均值,最大b值 为1000 s / mm 2 。图像分辨率为1.1 x 1.1 x 5毫米。 扩散扫描是在施用造影剂 之前进行的。 图像处理和分析许多经过充分验证的图像处理软件工具 来自牛津大学FMRIB中心软件库 (版本4.0,http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/10years/brochure/page-4) < / sup>用于本研究。为了能够从CE-T1和CE-SWI映射上存在的高强度区域测量ADC值 首先将所有串行图像注册到同一图像空间。 / sup>通过使用线性图像配准 Tool 11 通过仿射变换来确保所有 图像(CE-T1和ADC)被注册到与CE-SWI地图相同的图像空间 中。为了帮助增强功能的自动分割 ,我们然后使用FMRIB脑提取工具 移除了头骨。 12 提取增强功能< sup> CE-T1和CE-SWI体积是通过使用FMRIB中的Automated Segmentationation工具使用3类分割模型来实现的。 任何提取的增强区域在CE-T1和CE-SWI映射 上被发现在解剖上位于对应的液体衰减 上可见的高强度区域的边界 之外。 sup>反转恢复映像已手动编辑。此过程 能够生成CE-T1和CE-SWI增强蒙版,该蒙版更精确地表示肿瘤周围区域内 内有BBB扰动的组织。对于每个面罩,由于使用对比剂 后可能产生的T2 *效应,可能排除了与悖论性信号强度损失 相对应的区域。通过 CE相图的目视检查进行了仔细评估。 6 对比前T1图像上出现的超强区域是手动 从提取的CE-T1增强蒙版中删除。最适合CE-T1 和CE-SWI图上存在的超强区域的分段 遮罩随后直接转换为共同注册的 ADC图像进行评估,以便对 时间的这些增强蒙版中所有像素的 ADC值进行统计分析。因为ADC度量不是在增强掩码内呈正态分布 ,所以我们使用非参数解析 方法和Kolmogorov-Smirnov检验来确定是否存在 是每个参与者在每个连续成像时间 点之间的增强掩码中包含的 的ADC度量的任何显着差异。出于数据制表的目的,为每个增强掩码计算了 ADC的中值。 CE-T1和CE-SWI增强量之间的差异 结果表1给出了描述初始诊断 以及临床过程的患者人口统计学信息。表2中列出了来自CE-T1和CE-SWI映射的数据,以及ADC摘要 的度量。当比较增强 的数量时,我们发现在两个 时间点上, CE-SWI派生的蒙版与CE-T1蒙版的体积相比(分别为P = .002和P = .004)。尽管增强量存在 差异,但与所有患者相比, CE-T1或CE之间的ADC中位数 没有显着差异-SWI增强蒙版。复发性肿瘤患者的代表性 图像,显示与CE-T1增强 区域相比,CE-SWI面罩的体积减少了 ,在图1中给出。在此示例中,CE-SWI映射上可见的黑点区域 在解剖学上反映坏死和 血管结构 10 的区域与在相应的CE-T1上观察到的hyperintense 区域相关。在这种情况下,由于坏死的存在,可能会增加CE-T1增强蒙版中ADC 值的测量,这可能会导致 mask细微的变化。反映肿瘤再生或放射损伤的ADC的变化。 查看此表:[在此窗口中] [在新窗口中]表2:病变体积和ADC测量值 a 查看大图(78K):[在此窗口中] [在新窗口中]图1. A–C,GBM复发患者的代表性图像:CE-T1(A),CE-SWI( B)和ADC映射(C)。 D–F,自动定义的增强蒙版会覆盖在第一行中对应的地图上。请注意,CE-T1面罩内非特异性BBB泄漏的区域与SWI图上的坏死区域和血管结构相关(箭头)。在11位具有与 肿瘤复发相关的临床特征的参与者中,10/11的CE-SWI增强面罩内的ADC措施 明显减少。 11例中有5例活检证实 肿瘤长大。与CE-SWI结果相比,3/11 患者的ADC量显着减少,4/11 患者的CE-T1 内ADC显着增加增强蒙版。图2显示了患有复发性肿瘤的患者 的成像数据。在CE-T1和 CE-SWI映射的后续扫描中,增强 的数量有了显着增加。从CE-SWI增强 掩码得出的频率图显示,随着复发肿瘤病理的发展 ,ADC值逐渐降低。相比之下,CE-T1衍生的 频率图显示ADC措施显着增加。 在10例肿瘤复发患者中, 明显减少ADC措施,有7/10位患者的CE-T1和CE-SWI随访增强 量显着增加。 查看大图(48K):[在此窗口] [在新窗口中]图2。代表14的CE-T1(A和D),CE-SWI(B和E),ADC图(C和F)以及ADC频率图定义的复发性间变性少星形细胞瘤。顶部频率图显示了在CE-T1增强模板(红色)中找到的ADC值,而底部图显示了CE-SWI模板(蓝色)中包含的ADC值。顶行的图像对应于初始时间点,而底行的图像显示了后续扫描。对于ADC频率图,实线对应于在初始时间点获取的数据,而虚线来自后续数据。这些组合的数据突出显示了增强量(对于T1和SWI而言)的增加与CE-SWI增强面罩内复发肿瘤的ADC值显着降低之间的相关性。最有趣的是,CE-T1增强模板中的ADC明显增加,这可能反映了ADC分析中包括坏死。在6名最可能与化学辐射损伤(SD)相关的临床特征的患者中,5/6的CE-SWI增强面罩内的ADC措施显着升高。这些患者中有两个患者的CE-SWI增强增强 区域有所增加。相反,在CE-T1定义的增强 掩码内,有4名患者的 ADC值显着增加。图3显示了患有SD的 患者的频率图以及代表性图像。CE-SWI增强得出的 频率图突出显示了ADC 增强区域相比,该患者治疗后的>措施。仅1名患者在CE-T1上表现出信号强度增强的 模式,而在任一 增强>随访时间点。 查看大图(34K):[在此窗口中] [在新窗口中]图3. CE-T1代表(A和D),CE-SWI (B和E),ADC图(C和F)和10位SD患者最有可能与放射化学疗法引起的变化有关的ADC频率图。顶部频率图显示了在CE-T1增强模板(红色)中找到的ADC值,而底部图显示了CE-SWI模板(蓝色)中包含的ADC值。顶行的图像对应于初始时间点,而底行的图像显示了后续扫描。对于ADC频率图,实线对应于在初始时间点获取的数据,而虚线来自后续数据。对于此患者,增强量在时间点之间几乎没有变化,但是CE-SWI增强面罩内ADC值显着增加。后续扫描显示增强量没有进一步增加(数据未显示)。这种变化模式可能代表了病灶周围边界内的放射损伤。讨论在此初步研究中,我们首次报告了使用CE-SWI来指导ADC措施评估的 。这样的 一种策略可以评估实质性 组织在对比剂管理后表现出的ADC指数的评估, 不包括可能与包含血液和坏死区域的血管 在解剖上相关的区域。 在存在高度原发性脑肿瘤的患者中 伴随新的增强病变,我们发现CE-SWI 增强体积的增加以及该区域内ADC 的伴随减少是一个标志肿瘤复发。这一发现 在11例活检或临床影像学 随访诊断为复发性肿瘤的患者中是一致的。相比之下,所有6例SD患者 ,最有可能与化学放疗 损伤相关的诊断,ADC措施显着升高,CE病变增强 -SWI。 CE-SWI图未用于将患者 分为复发性或SD亚组。这是通过使用常规的 MR成像和临床检查程序来实现的。 在肿瘤 复发区域发现ADC措施减少的发现证实了这一点。 2,3 此外, 许多临床前和临床研究都报道了ADC措施与肿瘤之间 显着的负相关性< 13–16 尽管最近的一项研究发现,立体定向活检中ADC措施与细胞衰减之间没有任何关系 ,但是 a发现微血管衰减显着相关, 是增殖细胞活性的替代标志。 17 Sundgren等人发表的 研究 4 < / sup>报告了与肿瘤复发相关的ADC 测量值的增加。这种差异 可以用新增强病变的识别 与成像数据 的获取之间的更长的随访时间来解释(平均> 20个月)。在此期间,在CE-T1 MR成像上观察到的治疗后 增强病变可能包含其他坏死区域 ,这将提高ADC措施。在CE-SWI指导下进行ADC分析的 潜在地 可以解决这个令人困惑的问题。但是,在我们的研究中,有1名患者(活检9)经过活检证实了肿瘤复发 ,在CE-SWI增强范围内,ADC措施显着增加了 面具。该患者的组织学报告显示,尽管有一些浸润的肿瘤 细胞,但仍显着存在 。广泛的微坏死的发现可能有助于解释 提高的ADC措施,但是在这一阶段,我们无法推测 在随后的MR成像中ADC值是否会降低。 / sup>此发现还突出了将患者 分为RT或SD的问题。在许多情况下,肿瘤周围区域 将包含混合病理(即化学放射损伤 和可能复发的肿瘤)。但是,在该初步研究中,有任何证据显示在组织学样本中有浸润肿瘤细胞的情况,该患者被归类为复发性 肿瘤。在此阶段,我们还没有将ADC的测量值与 活检组织内的肿瘤细胞的扩散程度或数量相关联。 广泛的ADC在CE-SWI衍生的 增强面罩内测量值,该值对应于肿瘤的再生长(960-1560 s / mm 2 )。考虑到与本研究中包括的 相关的各种原发性脑肿瘤的异质性 病理,并且最重要的是scan 识别新的增强病变 与数据获取之间的随访期。由于这些原因,包括将 患者分为RT或SD,我们认为单个阈值 ADC值可以准确地区分复发肿瘤与 放射损伤可能性不大,并且可以从系列MR成像评估中获得有关治疗进展和结果的更多临床有用的信息 。我们观察到在两个月的 监测期内,CE-SWI指导的ADC措施发生了显着的 变化。这样的时间表非常适合当前的实践 关于治疗后2-3个月的每月随访影像。 这项研究有很多局限性。 在对比后SWI上检测到的信号强度 的确切组织学相关性尚未明确。然而, 一些未经组织学检查的,通过 使用SWI进行组织学参考的初步研究已经报道了改善的肿瘤边缘描述和肿瘤内静脉血管系统的检测 和出血。 6-10 最重要的是,最近的一项研究报道了 改善了药敏作用和图像质量的显着性 使用CE-SWI在肿瘤周围区域突出显示 该方法用于测量对比增强 (即BBB漏出)和病灶内药敏作用(即 坏死)。 9 这样的发现为在CE上增强区域 中测量ADC值的概念提供了支持。 -SWI映射以监测此 区域内的病理变化。 我们研究中的1位SD患者(7位患者)表现出 信号强度增强CE-T1 MR成像,在CE-SWI映射上没有可检测到的任何 高强度区域。对相应相位图像的研究 没有发现混叠伪影。 6 在CE-T1上,增强被限制在 部位的边缘。最初的肿瘤切除术,很可能与该区域内血管 的血管内皮的外科手术损伤有关。尽管 CE-SWI发现的临床表现尚不清楚,但仍需要进一步的工作以充分 了解组织学与信号强度 增强之间的关系。在CE-SWI上。我们已经使用CE-SWI映射来识别 BBB功能受损的坏死和实质组织区域。坏死区域将提高ADC措施 ,并可能掩盖与肿瘤 再生长相关的病理变化。使用从CE-SWI贴图得出的增强蒙版可能 包括一些也表现出信号强度 增强的血管区域。目前,我们的方法无法区分 这种可能性。但是,对对比前和对比后 的SWI数据进行仔细分析会提供更准确的实质蒙版。 其他限制是本研究中的患者人数很少, 每种情况下获取病理学组织学确认的难度 ,RT和SD患者之间的诊断 和持续成像时间之间的时差 组。可能诊断出放化疗 损伤的患者通常不会进行随访活检。同样, 可能复发肿瘤的患者可能需要进行后续手术; 但是,组织学结果在解剖学上不是特定的,因为 他们通常来自大型活检组织样本中包含 混合病理。显然,需要进一步的研究来确认 使用CE-SWI指导的ADC措施来检测复发-化学适应性损伤(sup),其中包括详细的立体定向活检分析。 / sup>结论在这项初步研究中,我们发现了证据,证明在连续CE-SWI图上增加的增强量 以及在< sup> 增强型肿瘤复发患者面罩与 与具有SD的患者比较。

著录项

  • 来源
    《American Journal of Neuroradiology》 |2010年第6期|00001049-00001054|共6页
  • 作者单位

    From the Centre for Magnetic Resonance (A.A.S., K.P., S.R.);

    Department of Medical Imaging (R.B., C.M., A.C.), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.;

    Department of Medical Imaging (R.B., C.M., A.C.), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.;

    From the Centre for Magnetic Resonance (A.A.S., K.P., S.R.);

    Department of Medical Imaging (R.B., C.M., A.C.), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.;

    From the Centre for Magnetic Resonance (A.A.S., K.P., S.R.)|University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research (S.R.)|Centre for Medical Diagnostic Technologies in Queensland (S.R.), The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Australia;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号