Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy of Perfusion MR Imaging in Primary and Metastatic Solitary Malignant Brain Tumors

References

1. ↵
   Lev MH, Ozsunar Y, Henson JW, 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;25:214–221

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. ↵
   Knopp EA, Cha S, Johnson G, et al. Glial neoplasms: dynamic contrast-enhanced T2*-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 1999;211:791–798

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. ↵
   Cha S, Knopp EA, Johnson G, et al. Intracranial mass lesions: dynamic contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted echo-planar perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2002;223:11–29

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. ↵
   Wetzel SG, Cha S, Johnson G, et al. Relative cerebral blood volume measurements in intracranial mass lesions: interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility study. Radiology 2002;224:797–803

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. ↵
   Wong JC, Provenzale JM, Petrella JR. Perfusion MR imaging of brain neoplasms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;14:1147–1157
6. Su M-Y, Muller A, Lao X, Nalcioglu O. Tumor characterization with dynamic contrast enhanced MRI using MR contrast agents of various molecular weights. Magn Reson Med 1998;39:259–269

   PubMedWeb of Science
7. ↵
   Aronen HJ, Gazit IE, Louis DN, et al. Cerebral blood volume maps of gliomas: comparison with tumor grade and histologic findings. Radiology 1994;191:41–51

   PubMedWeb of Science
8. ↵
   Brem S, Cotran R, Folkman. J. Tumor angiogenesis: a quantitative method for histological grading. J Natl Cancer Inst 1972;48:347–356
9. Rampling R, James A, Papanastassiou V. The present and future management of malignant brain tumours: surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004;75(suppl 2):ii24–ii30
10. Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, et al. Assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapeutics using MRI: recommendations for appropriate methodology for clinical trials. Br J Radiol 2003;76 (suppl 1):S87–S91
11. ↵
    Akella NS, Twieg DB, Mikkelsen T, et al. Assessment of brain tumor angiogenesis inhibitors using perfusion magnetic resonance imaging: quality and analysis results of a phase I trial. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;20:913–922

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. ↵
    McKnight TR, von dem Bussche MH, Vigneron DB. Histopathological validation of a three-dimensional magnetic resonance spectroscopy index as a predictor of tumor presence. J Neurosurg 2002;97:794–802

    PubMedWeb of Science
13. ↵
    Schwartz RB. Neuroradiology of brain tumors. Neurol Clin 1995;13:723–756

    PubMed
14. ↵
    Bitzer M, Klose U, Nägel T, et al. Echo planar perfusion imaging with high spatial and temporal resolution: methodology and clinical aspects. Eur Radiol 1999;9:221–229

    PubMed
15. ↵
    Uematsu H, Maeda M, Sadato N, et al. Vascular permeability: quantitative measurement with double echo dynamic MR imaging: theory and clinical application. Radiology 2000;214:912–917

    PubMed
16. ↵
    Jackson A, Kassner A, Zhu XP, Li KL. Reproducibility of T2* blood volume and vascular tortuosity maps in cerebral gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;14:510–516

    CrossRefPubMed
17. ↵
    Barbier EL, Lamalle L, Décorps M. Methodology of brain perfusion imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:496–520

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. ↵
    Weisskoff RM, Rosen BR. Noninvasive determination of regional cerebral blood flow in rats using dynamic imaging with Gd (DTPA). Magn Reson Med 1992;25:211–212

    CrossRefPubMed
19. ↵
    Intera application guide. Release 9. Vol 2: Scan methods. Best, the Netherlands: Philips Medical Systems;2002 :211–217
20. ↵
    Rosen BR, Belliveau JW, Vevea JM, Brady TJ. Perfusion imaging with NMR contrast agents. Magn Reson Med 1990;14:249–265

    PubMedWeb of Science
21. ↵
    Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, et al. Perfusion-sensitive MR imaging of gliomas: comparison between gradient-echo and spin-echo echo-planar imaging techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:1306–1315

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. ↵
    Kleihues P, Cavenee WK. WHO Classification of tumours: pathology and genetics of tumours of the nervous system. IARC, Lyon, France,2000 :9–70
23. ↵
    Law M, Yang S, 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;24:1989–1998

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. ↵
    Shin JH, Lee HK, Kwun BD, et al. Using relative cerebral blood flow and volume to evaluate the histopathologic grade of cerebral gliomas: preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:783–789

    CrossRefPubMed
25. ↵
    Folkman J. Role of angiogenesis in tumor growth and metastasis. Semin Oncol 2002;29(suppl 16):15–18
26. ↵
    Cha S, Johnson G, Wadghiri YZ, et al. Dynamic, contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI in mouse gliomas: correlation with histopathology. Magn Reson Med 2003;49:848–855

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. ↵
    Pathak AP, Schmainda KM, Ward BD, et al. MR-derived cerebral blood volume maps: issues regarding histological validation and assessment of tumor angiogenesis. Magn Reson Med 2001;46:735–747

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. ↵
    Law M, Yang S, Babb JS, et al. Comparison of cerebral blood volume and vascular permeability from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with glioma grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:746–755

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. ↵
    Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, et al. Correlation of MR imaging-determined cerebral blood volume maps with histologic and angiographic determination of vascularity of gliomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:1479–1486

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. ↵
    Daldrup H, Shames DM, Wendland M, et al. Correlation of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with histologic tumor grade: comparison of macromolecular and small-molecular contrast media. Pediatr Radiol 1998;28:67–78

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. Roberts HC, Roberts TP, Brasch RC, Dillon WP. Quantitative measurement of microvascular permeability in human brain tumors achieved using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: correlation with histologic grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:891–899

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. Ludemann L, Grieger W, Wurm R, et al. Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with WHO tumor grading for gliomas. Eur Radiol 2001;11:1231–1241

    CrossRefPubMed
33. Oh J, Henry RG, Pirzkall A, et al. Survival analysis in patients with glioblastoma multiforme: predictive value of choline-to-n-acetylaspartate index, apparent diffusion coefficient, and relative cerebral blood volume. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;19:546–554

    CrossRefPubMed
34. Lee SJ, Kim JH, Kim YM, et al. Perfusion MR imaging in gliomas: comparison with histologic tumor grade. Korean J Radiol 2001;2:1–7

    PubMed
35. Aronen HJ, Pardo FS, Kennedy DN, et al. High microvascular blood volume is associated with high glucose uptake and tumor angiogenesis in human gliomas. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:2189–2200

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
36. Roberts HC, Roberts TP, Bollen AW, et al. Correlation of microvascular permeability derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with histologic grade and tumor labeling index: a study in human brain tumors. Acad Radiol 2001;8:384–391

    CrossRefPubMed
37. Provenzale JM, Wang GR, Brenner T, et al. Comparison of permeability in high-grade and low-grade brain tumors using dynamic susceptibility contrast MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:711–716

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. Roberts HC, Roberts TP, 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;(suppl 1):S151–S155
39. Schmainda KM, Rand SD, Joseph AM, et al. Characterization of a first-pass gradient-echo spin-echo method to predict brain tumor grade and angiogenesis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:1524–1532

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
40. ↵
    Tropres I, Lamalle L, Peoc’h M, et al. In vivo assessment of tumoral angiogenesis. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:533–541

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
41. ↵
    Cha S, Tihan T, Crawford F, 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;26:266–273

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
42. ↵
    Law M, Cha S, Knopp EA, et al. High-grade gliomas and solitary metastases: differentiation by using perfusion and proton spectroscopic MR imaging. Radiology 2002;222:715–721

    PubMedWeb of Science
43. ↵
    Chiang IC, Kuo YT, Lu CY, et al. Distinction between high-grade gliomas and solitary metastases using peritumoral 3-T magnetic resonance spectroscopy, diffusion, and perfusion imagings. Neuroradiology 2004;46:619–627

    PubMedWeb of Science
44. ↵
    Kremer S, Grand S, Berger F, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: differentiating melanoma and renal carcinoma metastases from high-grade astrocytomas and other metastases. Neuroradiology 2003;45:44–49

    PubMed