Multi-parametric MR Imaging Biomarkers Associated to Clinical Outcomes in Gliomas: A Systematic Review

[EN] Purpose: To systematically review evidence regarding the association of multi-parametric biomarkers with clinical outcomes and their capacity to explain relevant subcompartments of gliomas. Materials and Methods: Scopus database was searched for original journal papers from January 1st, 2007 to February 20th , 2017 according to PRISMA. Four hundred forty-nine abstracts of papers were reviewed and scored independently by two out of six authors. Based on those papers we analyzed associations between biomarkers, subcompartments within the tumor lesion, and clinical outcomes. From all the articles analyzed, the twenty-seven papers with the highest scores were highlighted to represent the evidence about MR imaging biomarkers associated with clinical outcomes. Similarly, eighteen studies defining subcompartments within the tumor region were also highlighted to represent the evidence of MR imaging biomarkers. Their reports were critically appraised according to the QUADAS-2 criteria. Results: It has been demonstrated that multi-parametric biomarkers are prepared for surrogating diagnosis, grading, segmentation, overall survival, progression-free survival, recurrence, molecular profiling and response to treatment in gliomas. Quantifications and radiomics features obtained from morphological exams (T1, T2, FLAIR, T1c), PWI (including DSC and DCE), diffusion (DWI, DTI) and chemical shift imaging (CSI) are the preferred MR biomarkers associated to clinical outcomes. Subcompartments relative to the peritumoral region, invasion, infiltration, proliferation, mass effect and pseudo flush, relapse compartments, gross tumor volumes, and high-risk regions have been defined to characterize the heterogeneity. For the majority of pairwise cooccurrences, we found no evidence to assert that observed co-occurrences were significantly different from their expected co-occurrences (Binomial test with False Discovery Rate correction, alpha=0.05). The co-occurrence among terms in the studied papers was found to be driven by their individual prevalence and trends in the literature. Conclusion: Combinations of MR imaging biomarkers from morphological, PWI, DWI and CSI exams have demonstrated their capability to predict clinical outcomes in different management moments of gliomas. Whereas morphologic-derived compartments have been mostly studied during the last ten years, new multi-parametric MRI approaches have also been proposed to discover specific subcompartments of the tumors. MR biomarkers from those subcompartments show the local behavior within the heterogeneous tumor and may quantify the prognosis and response to treatment of gliomas.This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry for Investigation, Development and Innovation project with identification number DPI2016-80054-R.Oltra-Sastre, M.; Fuster García, E.; Juan -Albarracín, J.; Sáez Silvestre, C.; Perez-Girbes, A.; Sanz-Requena, R.; Revert-Ventura, A.... (2019). Multi-parametric MR Imaging Biomarkers Associated to Clinical Outcomes in Gliomas: A Systematic Review. Current Medical Imaging Reviews. 15(10):933-947. https://doi.org/10.2174/1573405615666190109100503S9339471510Louis D.N.; Perry A.; Reifenberger G.; The 2016 world health organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016,131(6),803-820Ostrom Q.T.; Gittleman H.; Fulop J.; 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-iv62Yachida S.; Jones S.; Bozic I.; Distant metastasis occurs late during the genetic evolution of pancreatic cancer. Nature 2010,467(7319),1114-1117Gerlinger M.; Rowan A.J.; Horswell S.; Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N Engl J Med 2012,366(10),883-892Sottoriva A.; Spiteri I.; Piccirillo S.G.M.; Intratumor heterogeneityin human glioblastoma reflects cancer evolutionary dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013,110(10),4009-4014Whiting P.F.; Rutjes A.W.; Westwood M.E.; QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011,155(8),529-536Stupp R.; Mason W.P.; van den Bent M.J.; Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005,352(10),987-996Ponte K.F.; Berro D.H.; Collet S.; In vivo relationship between hypoxia and angiogenesis in human glioblastoma: a multimodal imaging study. J Nucl Med 2017,58(10),1574-1579Pope W.B.; Kim H.J.; Huo J.; Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: ADC histogram analysis predicts response to bevacizumab treatment. Radiology 2009,252(1),182-189Mörén L.; Bergenheim A.T.; Ghasimi S.; Brännström T.; Johansson M.; Antti H.; Metabolomic screening of tumor tissue and serum in glioma patients reveals diagnostic and prognostic information. Metabolites 2015,5(3),502-520Prager A.J.; Martinez N.; Beal K.; Omuro A.; Zhang Z.; Young R.J.; Diffusion and perfusion MRI to differentiate treatment-related changes including pseudoprogression from recurrent tumors in high-grade gliomas with histopathologic evidence. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015,36(5),877-885Kickingereder P.; Burth S.; Wick A.; Radiomic profiling of glioblastoma: identifying an imaging predictor of patient survival with improved performance over established clinical and radiologic risk models. Radiology 2016,280(3),880-889Yoo R-E.; Choi S.H.; Cho H.R.; Tumor blood flow from arterial spin labeling perfusion MRI: a key parameter in distinguishing high-grade gliomas from primary cerebral lymphomas, and in predicting genetic biomarkers in high-grade gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013,38(4),852-860Liberman G.; Louzoun Y.; Aizenstein O.; Automatic multi-modal MR tissue classification for the assessment of response to bevacizumab in patients with glioblastoma. Eur J Radiol 2013,82(2),e87-e94Ramadan S.; Andronesi O.C.; Stanwell P.; Lin A.P.; Sorensen A.G.; Mountford C.E.; Use of in vivo two-dimensional MR spectroscopy to compare the biochemistry of the human brain to that of glioblastoma. Radiology 2011,259(2),540-549Xintao H.; Wong K.K.; Young G.S.; Guo L.; Wong S.T.; Support vector machine multi-parametric MRI identification of pseudoprogression from tumor recurrence in patients with resected glioblastoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011,33(2),296Ingrisch M.; Schneider M.J.; Nörenberg D.; Radiomic Analysis reveals prognostic information in T1-weighted baseline magnetic resonance imaging in patients with glioblastoma. Invest Radiol 2017,52(6),360-366Ulyte A.; Katsaros V.K.; Liouta E.; Prognostic value of preoperative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI perfusion parameters for high-grade glioma patients. Neuroradiology 2016,58(12),1197-1208O’Neill A.F.; Qin L.; Wen P.Y.; de Groot J.F.; Van den Abbeele A.D.; Yap J.T.; Demonstration of DCE-MRI as an early pharmacodynamic biomarker of response to VEGF Trap in glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 2016,130(3),495-503Kickingereder P.; Bonekamp D.; Nowosielski M.; Radiogenomics of glioblastoma: machine learning-based classification of molecular characteristics by using multiparametric and multiregional mr imaging features. Radiology 2016,281(3),907-918Roberto S-R.; Antonio R-V.; Luis M-B.; Angel A-B.; Gracián G-M.; Quantitative mr perfusion parameters related to survival time in high-grade gliomas. European Radiology 2013,23(12),3456-3465Jain R.; Poisson L.; Narang J.; Genomic mapping and survival prediction in glioblastoma: molecular subclassification strengthened by hemodynamic imaging biomarkers. Radiology 2013,267(1),212-220Fathi K.A.; Mohseni M.; Rezaei S.; Bakhshandehpour G.; Saligheh R.H.; Multi-parametric (ADC/PWI/T2-W) image fusion approach for accurate semi-automatic segmentation of tumorous regions in glioblastoma multiforme. MAGMA 2015,28(1),13-22Caulo M.; Panara V.; Tortora D.; Data-driven grading of brain gliomas: a multiparametric MR imaging study. Radiology 2014,272(2),494-503Alexiou G.A.; Zikou A.; Tsiouris S.; Comparison of diffusion tensor, dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI and (99m)Tc-Tetrofosmin brain SPECT for the detection of recurrent high-grade glioma. Magn Reson Imaging 2014,32(7),854-859Van Cauter S.; De Keyzer F.; Sima D.M.; Integrating diffusion kurtosis imaging, dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI, and short echo time chemical shift imaging for grading gliomas. Neuro-oncol 2014,16(7),1010-1021Seeger A.; Braun C.; Skardelly M.; Comparison of three different MR perfusion techniques and MR spectroscopy for multiparametric assessment in distinguishing recurrent high-grade gliomas from stable disease. Acad Radiol 2013,20(12),1557-1565Chawalparit O.; Sangruchi T.; Witthiwej T.; Diagnostic performance of advanced mri in differentiating high-grade from low-grade gliomas in a setting of routine service. J Med Assoc Thai 2013,96(10),1365-1373Li Y.; Lupo J.M.; Parvataneni R.; Survival analysis in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma using pre- and postradiotherapy MR spectroscopic imaging. Neuro-oncol 2013,15(5),607-617Shankar J.J.S.; Woulfe J.; Silva V.D.; Nguyen T.B.; Evaluation of perfusion CT in grading and prognostication of high-grade gliomas at diagnosis: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013,200(5)Zinn P.O.; Mahajan B.; Sathyan P.; Radiogenomic mapping of edema/cellular invasion MRI-phenotypes in glioblastoma multiforme. PLoS One 2011,6(10)Matsusue E.; Fink J.R.; Rockhill J.K.; Ogawa T.; Maravilla K.R.; Distinction between glioma progression and post-radiation change by combined physiologic MR imaging. Neuroradiology 2010,52(4),297-306Juan-Albarracín J.; Fuster-Garcia E.; Manjón J.V.; Automated glioblastoma segmentation based on a multiparametric structured unsupervised classification. PLoS One 2015,10(5)Itakura H.; Achrol A.S.; Mitchell L.A.; Magnetic resonance image features identify glioblastoma phenotypic subtypes with distinct molecular pathway activities. Sci Transl Med 2015,7(303)Ion-Margineanu A.; Van Cauter S.; Sima D.M.; Tumour relapse prediction using multiparametric MR data recorded during follow-up of GBM patients. BioMed Res Int 2015,2015Durst C.R.; Raghavan P.; Shaffrey M.E.; Multimodal MR imaging model to predict tumor infiltration in patients with gliomas. Neuroradiology 2014,56(2),107-115Yoon J.H.; Kim J.H.; Kang W.J.; Grading of cerebral glioma with multi-parametric MR Imaging and 18F-FDG-PET: concordance and accuracy. European Radiol 2014,24(2),380-389Demerath T.; Simon-Gabriel C.P.; Kellner E.; Mesoscopic imaging of glioblastomas: are diffusion, perfusion and spectroscopic measures influenced by the radiogenetic phenotype? Neuroradiol J 2017,30(1),36-47Qin L.; Li X.; Stroiney A.; Advanced MRI assessment to predict benefit of anti-programmed cell death 1 protein immunotherapy response in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Neuroradiology 2017,59(2),135-145Boult J.K.R.; Borri M.; Jury A.; Investigating intracranial tumour growth patterns with multiparametric MRI incorporating Gd-DTPA and USPIO-enhanced imaging. NMR Biomed 2016,29(11),1608-1617Server A.; Kulle B.; Gadmar Ø.B.; Josefsen R.; Kumar T.; Nakstad P.H.; Measurements of diagnostic examination performance using quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient and proton MR spectroscopic imaging in the preoperative evaluation of tumor grade in cerebral gliomas. Eur J Radiol 2011,80(2),462-470Chang P.D.; Chow D.S.; Yang P.H.; Filippi C.G.; Lignelli A.; Predicting glioblastoma recurrence by early changes in the apparent diffusion coefficient value and signal intensity on FLAIR images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017,208(1),57-65Yi C.; Shangjie R.; Volume of high-risk intratumoralsubregions at multi-parametric MR imaging predicts overall survival and complements molecular analysis of glioblastoma. Eur Radiol 2017,27,3583-3592Khalifa J.; Tensaouti F.; Chaltiel L.; Identification of a candidate biomarker from perfusion MRI to anticipate glioblastoma progression after chemoradiation. Eur Radiol 2016,26(11),4194-4203Prateek P.; Jay P.; Partovi S.; Madabhushi A.; Tiwari P.; Radiomic features from the peritumoral brain parenchyma on treatment-naïve multi-parametric MR imaging predict long versus short-term survival in glioblastomamultiforme: preliminary findings. Eur Radiol 2017,27(10),4188-4197Lemasson B.; Chenevert T.L.; Lawrence T.S.; Impact of perfusion map analysis on early survival prediction accuracy in glioma patients. Transl Oncol 2013,6(6),766-774Inano R.; Oishi N.; Kunieda T.; Visualization of heterogeneity and regional grading of gliomas by multiple features using magnetic resonance-based clustered images. Sci Rep 2016,6,30344Delgado-Goñi T.; Ortega-Martorell S.; Ciezka M.; MRSI-based molecular imaging of therapy response to temozolomide in preclinical glioblastoma using source analysis. NMR Biomed 2016,29(6),732-743Cui Y.; Tha K.K.; Terasaka S.; Prognostic imaging biomarkers in glioblastoma: development and independent validation on the basis of multiregion and quantitative analysis of MR images. Radiology 2016,278(2),546-553Price S.J.; Young A.M.H.; Scotton W.J.; Multimodal MRI can identify perfusion and metabolic changes in the invasive margin of glioblastomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016,43(2),487-494Sauwen N.; Acou M.; Van Cauter S.; Comparison of unsupervised classification methods for brain tumor segmentation using multi-parametric MRI. Neuroimage Clin 2016,12,753-764Jena A.; Taneja S.; Gambhir A.; Glioma recurrence versus radiation necrosis: single-session multiparametric approach using simultaneous O-(2-18F-Fluoroethyl)-L-Tyrosine PET/MRI. Clin Nucl Med 2016,41(5),e228-e236Kim H.S.; Goh M.J.; Kim N.; Choi C.G.; Kim S.J.; Kim J.H.; Which combination of MR imaging modalities is best for predicting recurrent glioblastoma? Study of diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility. Radiology 2014,273(3),831-843Christoforidis G.A.; Yang M.; Abduljalil A.; “Tumoral pseudoblush” identified within gliomas at high-spatial-resolution ultrahigh-field-strength gradient-echo MR imaging corresponds to microvascularity at stereotactic biopsy. Radiology 2012,264(1),210-217Wang S.; Kim S.; Chawla S.; Differentiation between glioblastomas, solitary brain metastases, and primary cerebral lymphomas using diffusion tensor and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011,32(3),507-514Hanahan D.; Weinberg R.A.; Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 2011,144(5),646-674Macdonald D.R.; Cascino T.L.; Schold S.C.; Cairncross J.G.; Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 1990,8(7),1277-1280Wen P.Y.; Macdonald D.R.; Reardon D.A.; Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 2010,28(11),1963-1972Sorensen A.G.; Batchelor T.T.; Wen P.Y.; Zhang W-T.; Jain R.K.; Response criteria for glioma. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2008,5(11),634-644Rosenkrantz A.B.; Friedman K.; Chandarana H.; Current status of hybrid PET/MRI in oncologic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016,206(1),162-172Castiglioni I.; Gallivanone F.; Canevari C.; Hybrid PET/MRI for In vivo imaging of cancer: current clinical experiences and recent advances. Curr Med Imaging 2016,12,106Mainta I.C.; Perani D.; Delattre B.M.A.; FDG PET/MR imaging in major neurocognitive disorders. Curr Alzheimer Res 2017,14,186-197Marner L.; Henriksen O.M.; Lundemann M.; Larsen V.A.; Law I.; Clinical PET/MRI in neurooncology: opportunities and challenges from a single-institution perspective. Clin Transl Imaging 2017,5(2),135-149R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; 2015. Available from: https://www.R-project.org

Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions

Contains fulltext : 203381.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)CONTEXT: The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 analysis system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) detection of prostate cancer (PCa) is based on PI-RADS v1, accumulated scientific evidence, and expert consensus opinion. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the accuracy, strengths and weaknesses of PI-RADS v2, discuss pathway implications of its use and outline opportunities for improvements and future developments. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: For this consensus expert opinion from the PI-RADS steering committee, clinical studies, systematic reviews, and professional guidelines for mpMRI PCa detection were evaluated. We focused on the performance characteristics of PI-RADS v2, comparing data to systems based on clinicoradiologic Likert scales and non-PI-RADS v2 imaging only. Evidence selections were based on high-quality, prospective, histologically verified data, with minimal patient selection and verifications biases. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice retains higher accuracy over systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies for PCa diagnosis. PI-RADS v2 fails to detect all cancers but does detect the majority of tumors capable of causing patient harm, which should not be missed. Test performance depends on the definition and prevalence of clinically significant disease. Good performance can be attained in practice when the quality of the diagnostic process can be assured, together with joint working of robustly trained radiologists and urologists, conducting biopsy procedures within multidisciplinary teams. CONCLUSIONS: It has been shown that the test performance of PI-RADS v2 in research and clinical practice is improved, retaining higher accuracy over systematic TRUS biopsies for PCa diagnosis. PATIENT SUMMARY: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI-directed biopsies using the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System improves the detection of prostate cancers likely to cause harm, and at the same time decreases the detection of disease that does not lead to harms if left untreated. The keys to success are high-quality imaging, reporting, and biopsies by radiologists and urologists working together in multidisciplinary teams

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Management: Current Status and Future Perspectives

Item does not contain fulltextThis article reviews recent and ongoing developments in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate. Advances in T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, and spectroscopic imaging are described along with advances related to radiofrequency coils and imaging at high magnetic field. As mpMRI is increasingly becoming routine in various aspects of clinical prostate cancer management, its role in detection, localization, staging, assessment of aggressiveness, and active surveillance is discussed. Combined with growing clinical adoption of the techniques already at hand, continual optimization of acquisition techniques and image interpretation schemes will further strengthen the role of mpMRI as an important diagnostic test in prostate cancer management

Reply to Byung Kwan Park's Letter to the Editor re: Baris Turkbey, Andrew B. Rosenkrantz, Masoom A. Haider, et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol 2019;76:329-40

Contains fulltext : 209079.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

Assessment of change in prostate volume and shape following surgical resection through co-registration of in-vivo MRI and fresh specimen ex-vivo MRI

International audienc

PI-RADS Version 2: A Pictorial Update

The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) is the result of an extensive international collaborative effort. PI-RADS provides a comprehensive yet practical set of guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging that will promote the use of this modality for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. The revised PI-RADS version (PI-RADS version 2) introduces important changes to the original system used for assessing the level of suspicion for clinically significant cancer with multiparametric MR imaging. For peripheral zone abnormalities in PI-RADS version 2, the score obtained from the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map in combination with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) performed with high b values (>/=1400 sec/mm2) is the dominant parameter for determining the overall level of suspicion for clinically significant cancer. For transition zone abnormalities, the score obtained from T2-weighted MR imaging is dominant for overall lesion assessment. Dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging has ancillary roles in the characterization of peripheral zone lesions considered equivocal for clinically significant cancer on the basis of the DWI-ADC combination and in the detection of lesions missed with other multiparametric MR pulse sequences. Assessment with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging is also simplified, being considered positive or negative on the basis of qualitative evaluation for a focal area of rapid enhancement matching an abnormality on DWI-ADC or T2-weighted MR images. In PI-RADS version 2, MR spectroscopic imaging is not incorporated into lesion assessment. In this article, a pictorial overview is provided of the revised PI-RADS version 2 assessment categories for the likelihood of clinically significant cancer. PI-RADS version 2 is expected to evolve with time, with updated versions being released as experience in the use of PI-RADS version 2 increases and as new scientific evidence and technologies emerge. (c)RSNA, 2016