Combining amide proton transfer-weighted and arterial spin labeling imaging to differentiate solitary brain metastases from glioblastomas

Differentiation between glioblastoma and solitary brain metastases using perfusion and amide proton transfer weighted MRI

Objectives

Early diagnostic separation between glioblastoma (GBM) and solitary metastases (MET) is important for patient management but remains challenging when based on imaging only. The objective of this study was to assess whether amide proton transfer weighted (APTw) MRI alone or combined with dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI parameters, including cerebral blood volume (CBV), cerebral blood flow (CBF), and leakage parameter (K2) measurements, can differentiate GBM from MET.

Methods

APTw MRI and DSC-MRI were performed on 18 patients diagnosed with GBM (N = 10) or MET (N = 8). Quantitative parameter maps were calculated, and regions-of-interest (ROIs) were placed in whole tumor, contrast-enhanced tumor (ET), edema, necrosis and normal-appearing white matter (NAWM). The mean and max of the APTw signal, CBF, leakage-corrected CBV and K2 were obtained from each ROI. Except for K2, all were normalized to NAWM (nAPTwmean/max, nCBFmean/max, ncCBVmean/max,). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and area-under-the-curve (AUC) were assessed for different parameter combinations. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

When comparing GBM to MET, nAPTmax, nCBFmax, ncCBVmax and ncCBVmean were significantly increased (p < 0.05) in ET with AUC being 0.81, 0.83, 0.85, and 0.83, respectively. Combinations of nAPTwmax + ncCBVmax, nAPTwmean + ncCBVmean, nAPTwmax + nCBFmax, nAPTwmax + K2max and nAPTwmax + ncCBVmax + K2max in ET showed significant prediction in differentiating GBM and MET (AUC = 0.92, 0.82, 0.92, 0.85, and 0.92 respectively).

Conclusion

When assessed in Gd-enhanced tumor areas, nAPTw MRI signal intensity alone or combined with DSC-MRI parameters, was an excellent predictor for differentiating GBM and MET. However, the small cohort warrants future studies.

Differentiation Between High-Grade Glioma and Brain Metastasis Using Cerebral Perfusion-Related Parameters (Cerebral Blood Volume and Cerebral Blood Flow): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Perfusion-weighted MRI Techniques

BACKGROUND

Distinguishing high-grade gliomas (HGGs) from brain metastases (BMs) using perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI) remains challenging. PWI offers quantitative measurements of cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cerebral blood volume (CBV), but optimal PWI parameters for differentiation are unclear.

PURPOSE

To compare CBF and CBV derived from PWIs in HGGs and BMs, and to identify the most effective PWI parameters and techniques for differentiation.

STUDY TYPE

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

POPULATION

Twenty-four studies compared CBF and CBV between HGGs (n = 704) and BMs (n = 488).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

Arterial spin labeling (ASL), dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE), and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced (DSCE) sequences at 1.5 T and 3.0 T.

ASSESSMENT

Following the PRISMA guidelines, four major databases were searched from 2000 to 2024 for studies evaluating CBF or CBV using PWI in HGGs and BMs.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs was used. Risk of bias (ROB) and publication bias were assessed, and I2 statistic was used to assess statistical heterogeneity. A P-value<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

HGGs showed a significant modest increase in CBF (SMD = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.05-0.69) and CBV (SMD = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.01-0.51) compared with BMs. Subgroup analysis based on region, sequence, ROB, and field strength for CBF (HGGs: 375 and BMs: 222) and CBV (HGGs: 493 and BMs: 378) values were conducted. ASL showed a considerable moderate increase (50% overlapping CI) in CBF for HGGs compared with BMs. However, no significant difference was found between ASL and DSC (P = 0.08).

DATA CONCLUSION

ASL-derived CBF may be more useful than DSC-derived CBF in differentiating HGGs from BMs. This suggests that ASL may be used as an alternative to DSC when contrast medium is contraindicated or when intravenous injection is not feasible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1

TECHNICAL EFFICACY

Stage 2.

Effects of amide proton transfer imaging in diagnosis, grading and prognosis prediction of cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To assess the effectiveness of Amide Proton Transfer (APT) imaging in predicting the histopathological characteristics of cervical cancer.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, covering studies until December 27, 2023. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15 and Review Manager 5.4 software. Key metrics analyzed included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic curves. The analysis focused on differentiating cervical cancer types, squamous carcinoma differentiation, and lymph node involvement. Meta-regression was employed to investigate heterogeneity.

Results

Thirteen studies involving 868 patients were included in the meta-analysis. For differentiating adenocarcinoma from squamous carcinoma, the pooled sensitivity was 0.82 (95%CI: 0.71-0.90), specificity was 0.65 (95%CI: 0.48-0.79), and DOR was 9 (95%CI: 1.6-3.5). When distinguishing poorly differentiated from moderately/well-differentiated squamous carcinoma, the sensitivity was 0.74 (95%CI: 0.66-0.81), specificity was 0.83 (95%CI: 0.75-0.89), and DOR was 14 (95%CI: 8-23). For identifying lymph node involvement, the sensitivity was 0.87 (95%CI: 0.78-0.92), specificity was 0.66 (95%CI: 0.59-0.73), and DOR was 13 (95%CI: 7-26). No publication bias was detected.

Conclusions

APT imaging demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing between cervical cancer types, grading squamous carcinoma, and detecting lymph node involvement. It can be considered a reliable technique for predicting the pathological features of cervical cancer in clinical practice.

Advances in diffuse glioma assessment: preoperative and postoperative applications of chemical exchange saturation transfer

Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer (CEST) is a technique that uses specific off-resonance saturation pulses to pre-saturate targeted substances. This process influences the signal intensity of free water, thereby indirectly providing information about the pre-saturated substance. Among the clinical applications of CEST, Amide Proton Transfer (APT) is currently the most well-established. APT can be utilized for the preoperative grading of gliomas. Tumors with higher APTw signals generally indicate a higher likelihood of malignancy. In predicting preoperative molecular typing, APTw values are typically lower in tumors with favorable molecular phenotypes, such as isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutations, compared to IDH wild-type tumors. For differential diagnosis, the average APTw values of meningiomas are significantly lower than those of high-grade gliomas. Various APTw measurement indices assist in distinguishing central nervous system lesions with similar imaging features, such as progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, central nervous system lymphoma, solitary brain metastases, and glioblastoma. Regarding prognosis, APT effectively differentiates between tumor recurrence and treatment effects, and also possesses predictive capabilities for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Association between the Anatomical Location of Glioblastoma and Its Evaluation with Clinical Considerations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Glioblastoma is a primary malignant brain tumor; it is aggressive with a high degree of malignancy and unfavorable prognosis and is the most common type of malignant brain tumor. Glioblastomas can be located in the brain, cerebellum, brainstem, and spinal cord, originating from glial cells, particularly astrocytes. Methods: The databases MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and CINAHL were researched up to January 2024. Two authors independently performed the search, study selection, and data extraction. Methodological quality was evaluated with an assurance tool for anatomical studies (AQUA). The statistical mean, standard deviation, and difference of means calculated with the Student's t-test for presence between hemispheres and presence in the frontal and temporal lobes were analyzed. Results: A total of 123 studies met the established selection criteria, with a total of 6224 patients. In relation to the mean, GBM between hemispheres had a mean of 33.36 (SD 58.00) in the right hemisphere and a mean of 34.70 (SD 65.07) in the left hemisphere, due to the difference in averages between hemispheres. There were no statistically significant differences, p = 0.35. For the comparison between the presence of GBM in the frontal lobe and the temporal lobe, there was a mean in the frontal lobe of 23.23 (SD 40.03), while in the temporal lobe, the mean was 22.05 (SD 43.50), and for the difference in means between the frontal lobe and the temporal lobe, there was no statistically significant difference for the presence of GBM, p = 0.178. Conclusions: We believe that before a treatment, it will always be correct to know where the GBM is located and how it behaves clinically, in order to generate correct conservative or surgical treatment guidelines for each patient. We believe that more detailed studies are also needed to show why GBM is associated more with some regions than others, despite the brain structure being homologous to other regions in which GMB occurs less frequently, which is why knowing its predominant presence in brain regions is very important.

Comparison of ASL and DSC perfusion methods in the evaluation of response to treatment in patients with a history of treatment for malignant brain tumor

OBJECTIVE

Perfusion MRI is of great benefit in the post-treatment evaluation of brain tumors. Interestingly, dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced (DSC) perfusion has taken its place in routine examination for this purpose. The use of arterial spin labeling (ASL), a perfusion technique that does not require exogenous contrast material injection, has gained popularity in recent years. The aim of the study was to compare two different perfusion techniques, ASL and DSC, using qualitative and quantitative measurements and to investigate the diagnostic effectiveness of both. The fact that the number of patients is higher than in studies conducted with 3D pseudo-continious ASL (pCASL), the study group is heterogeneous as it consists of patients with both metastases and glial tumors, the use of 3D Turbo Gradient Spin Echo (TGSE), and the inclusion of visual (qualitative) assessment make our study unique.

METHODS

Ninety patients, who were treated for malignant brain tumor, were enrolled in the retrospective study. DSC Cerebral Blood Volume (CBV), Cerebral Blood Flow (CBF) and ASL CBF maps of each case were obtained. In qualitative analysis, the lesions of the cases were visually classified as treatment-related changes (TRC) and relapse/residual mass (RRT). In the quantitative analysis, three regions of interest (ROI) measurements were taken from each case. The average of these measurements was compared with the ROI taken from the contralateral white matter and normalized values (n) were obtained. These normalized values were compared across events.

RESULTS

Uncorrected DSC normalized CBV (nCBV), DSC normalized CBF (nCBF) and ASL nCBF values of RRT cases were higher than those of TRC cases (p < 0.001). DSC nCBV values were correlated with DSC nCBF (r: 0.94, p < 0.001) and correlated with ASL nCBF (r: 0.75, p < 0.001). Similarly, ASL nCBF was positively correlated with DSC nCBF (r: 0.79 p < 0.01). When the ROC curve parameters were evaluated, the cut-off values were determined as 1.211 for DSC nCBV (AUC: 0.95, 93% sensitivity, 82% specificity), 0.896 for DSC nCBF (AUC; 0.95, 93% sensitivity, 82% specificity), and 0.829 for ASL nCBF (AUC: 0.84, 78% sensitivity, 75% specificity). For qualitative evaluation (visual evaluation), inter-observer agreement was found to be good for ASL CBF (0.714), good for DSC CBF (0.790), and excellent for DSC CBV (0.822). Intra-observer agreement was also evaluated. For the first observer, good agreement was found in ASL CBF (0.626, 70% sensitive, 93% specific), in DSC CBF (0.713, 76% sensitive, 95% specific), and in DSC CBV (0.755, 87% sensitive - 88% specific). In the second observer, moderate agreement was found in ASL CBF (0.584, 61% sensitive, 97% specific) and DSC CBF (0.649, 65% sensitive, 100% specific), and excellent agreement in DSC CBV (0.800, 89% sensitive, 90% specific).

CONCLUSION

It was observed that uncorrected DSC nCBV, DSC nCBF and ASL nCBF values were well correlated with each other. In qualitative evaluation, inter-observer and intra-observer agreement was higher in DSC CBV than DSC CBF and ASL CBF. In addition, DSC CBV is found more sensitive, ASL CBF and DSC CBF are found more specific for both observers. From a diagnostic perspective, all three parameters DSC CBV, DSC CBF and ASL CBF can be used, but it was observed that the highest rate belonged to DSC CBV.

Arterial Spin Labeling and Amide Proton Transfer Imaging can Differentiate Glioblastoma from Brain Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, arterial spin labeling (ASL) and amide proton transfer (APT) imaging have shown potential for distinguishing glioblastoma from brain metastases. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to investigate this further.

METHODS

An extensive and comprehensive search was conducted in 6 English and Chinese databases according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, encompassing data up to July 2023. Data from eligible literature were extracted, and bivariate models were employed to calculate pooled sensitivities, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 11 articles. For ASL, the pooled sensitivity was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.87), and the pooled specificity was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77-0.93). The pooled PLR was 5.89 (95% CI, 2.97-11.69), the pooled NLR was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.15-0.47), the pooled DOR was 22.33 (95% CI, 6.89-72.34), and AUC was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.92). For APT imaging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85), and the pooled specificity was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.77-0.92). The pooled PLR was 5.51 (95% CI, 3.24-9.37), the pooled NLR was 0.25 (95% CI, 0.17-0.37), the pooled DOR was 21.99 (95% CI, 10.28-47.03), and the AUC was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggest that both ASL and APT imaging exhibit high accuracy in distinguishing between glioblastoma and brain metastasis.