Pseudoprogression and Pseudoresponse: Imaging Challenges in the Assessment of Posttreatment Glioma

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Stupp R,
   2. Mason WP,
   3. van den Bent MJ,
   4. et al

   . Radiotheraphy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2005;352:987–96

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Macdonald DR,
   2. Cascino T,
   3. Schold SJ,
   4. et al

   . Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:1277–80

   Abstract
3. 3.↵
   1. Wen PY,
   2. Macdonald DR,
   3. Reardon DA,
   4. et al

   . Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1963–72

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Sorensen AG,
   2. Batchelor TT,
   3. Wen PY,
   4. et al

   . Response criteria for glioma. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2008;5:634–44

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Brandsma D,
   2. van den Bent MJ

   . Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas. Curr Opin Neurol 2009;22:633–38

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Kumar AJ,
   2. Leeds NE,
   3. Fuller GN,
   4. et al

   . Malignant gliomas: MR imaging spectrum of radiation therapy- and chemotherapy-induced necrosis of brain after treatment. Radiology 2000;217:377–84

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Ulmer S,
   2. Braga TA,
   3. Barker FG 2nd.,
   4. et al

   . Clinical and radiographic features of peritumoral infarction resection of glioblastoma. Neurology 2006:67:1668–70

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. de Wit MC,
   2. de Bruin HG,
   3. Eijkenboom W,
   4. et al

   . Immediate post-radiotherapy changes in malignant glioma can mimic tumor progression. Neurology 2004;63:535–37

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Brandsma D,
   2. Stalpers L,
   3. Taal W,
   4. et al

   . Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant glioma. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:453–61

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Taal W,
    2. Brandsma D,
    3. de Bruin HG,
    4. et al

    . Incidence of early pseudo-progression in cohort of malignant glioma patients treated with chemoirradiation with temozolomide. Cancer 2008;113:405–10

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Brandes AA,
    2. Franceschi E,
    3. Tosoni A,
    4. et al

    . MGMT promoter methylation status can predict the incidence and outcome of pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2192–97

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Brandes AA,
    2. Tosoni A,
    3. Franceschi E,
    4. et al

    . Recurrence pattern after temozolomide concomitant with and adjuvant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma: correlation with MGMT promoter methylation status. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1275–79

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Chamberlain MC

    . Pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4359

    FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Chaski C,
    2. Neyns B,
    3. Michotte A,
    4. et al

    . Pseudoprogression after radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide for high-grade glioma: clinical observations and working recommendations. Surg Neurol 2009;72:423–28

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Mangla R,
    2. Singh G,
    3. Ziegelitz D,
    4. et al

    . Changes in relative cerebral blood volume 1 month after radiation-temozolomide therapy can help predict overall survival in patients with glioblastoma. Radiology 2010;256:575–84

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Sanghera P,
    2. Perry J,
    3. Sahgal A,
    4. et al

    . Pseudoprogression following chemoradiotherapy for glioblastoma multiforme. Can J Neurol Sci 2010;37:36–42

    PubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Clarke JL,
    2. Abrey LE,
    3. Karimi S,
    4. et al

    . Pseudoprogression (PsPr) after concurrent radiotherapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) for newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2025
18. 18.↵
    1. Gerstner ER,
    2. McNamara MB,
    3. Norden AD,
    4. et al

    . Effect of adding temozolomide to radiation therapy on the incidence of pseudo-progression. J Neurooncol 2009;94:97–101

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Jefferies S,
    2. Burton K,
    3. Jones P,
    4. et al

    . Interpretation of early imaging after concurrent radiotherapy and temozolomide for glioblastoma [abstract]. Clin Oncol 2007;19:S33
20. 20.↵
    1. Brandes AA,
    2. Tosoni A,
    3. Spagnolli F,
    4. et al

    . Disease progression or pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy treatment: pitfalls in neurooncology. Neuro Oncol 2008;10:361–67. Epub 2008 Apr 9

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Tsien C,
    2. Galbán CJ,
    3. Chenevert TL,
    4. et al

    . Parametric response map as an imaging biomarker to distinguish progression from pseudoprogression in high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2293–99

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Gahramanov S,
    2. Raslan AM,
    3. Muldoon LL,
    4. et al

    . Potential for differentiation of pseudoprogression from true tumor progression with dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrasted-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using feruxomytol vs. gadoteridol: a pilot study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;79:514–23

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Clarke JL,
    2. Chang S

    . Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse: challenges in brain tumor imaging. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2009;9:241–46

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Sundgren PC,
    2. Fan X,
    3. Weybright P,
    4. et al

    . Differentiation of recurrent brain tumor versus radiation injury using diffusion tensor imaging in patients with new contrast enhancing lesions. Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:1131–42

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Sundgren PC

    . MR spectroscopy in radiation injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:1469–76

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. Ricci PE,
    2. Karis JP,
    3. Heiserman JE,
    4. et al.

    , Differentiating recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis: time for re-evaluation of positron emission tomography? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1998;19:407–13

    Abstract
27. 27.↵
    1. Hustinx R,
    2. Pourdehnad M,
    3. Kaschten B,
    4. et al

    . PET imaging for differentiating recurrent brain tumor from radiation necrosis. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43:35–47

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Batchelor TT,
    2. Sorensen AG,
    3. di Tomaso E,
    4. et al

    . AZD2171, a pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, normalizes tumor vasculature and alleviates edema in glioblastoma patients. Cancer Cell 2007;11:83–95

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
29. 29.↵
    1. Pope WB,
    2. Lai A,
    3. Nghiemphu P,
    4. et al

    . MRI in patient with high-grade gliomas treated with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. Neurology 2006;66:1258–60

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Norden AD,
    2. Young GS,
    3. Setayesh K,
    4. et al

    . Bevacizumab for recurrent malignant gliomas: efficacy, toxicity, and patterns of recurrence. Neurology 2008;70:779–87

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    1. Jain RK,
    2. Duda DG,
    3. Willett CG,
    4. et al

    . Biomarkers of response and resistance to antiangiogenic therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2009;6:327–38

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    1. Gerstner ER,
    2. Chen PJ,
    3. Wen PY,
    4. et al

    . Infiltrative patterns of glioblastoma spread detected via diffusion MRI after treatment with cediranib. Neuro Oncol 2010;12:466–72

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Pope WB,
    2. Kim HJ,
    3. Huo J,
    4. et al

    . Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: ADC histogram analysis predicts response to bevacizumab treatment. Radiology 2009;252:182–89

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
34. 34.↵
    1. Gerstner ER,
    2. Duda DG,
    3. di Tomaso E,
    4. et al

    . VEGF inhibitors in the treatment of cerebral edema in patients with brain cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2009;6:229–36

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Sorensen AG,
    2. Batchelor TT,
    3. Zhang WT,
    4. et al

    . A “vascular normalization index” as potential mechanistic biomarker to predict survival after a single dose of cediranib in recurrent glioblastoma patients. Cancer Res 2009;69:5296–300

    Abstract/FREE Full Text