Cluster Analysis of DSC MRI, Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI, and DWI Parameters Associated with Prognosis in Patients with Glioblastoma after Removal of the Contrast-Enhancing Component: A Preliminary Study

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Silantyev AS,
   2. Falzone L,
   3. Libra M, et al

   . Current and future trends on diagnosis and prognosis of glioblastoma: from molecular biology to proteomics. Cells 2019;8:863 doi:10.3390/cells8080863 pmid:31405017

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.
   1. Thakkar JP,
   2. Dolecek TA,
   3. Horbinski C, et al

   . Epidemiologic and molecular prognostic review of glioblastoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014;23:1985–96 doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0275 pmid:25053711

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Louis DN,
   2. Perry A,
   3. Reifenberger G, et al

   . The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016;131:803–20 doi:10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1 pmid:27157931

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Hardesty DA,
   2. Sanai N

   . The value of glioma extent of resection in the modern neurosurgical era. Front Neurol 2012;3:140 doi:10.3389/fneur.2012.00140 pmid:23087667

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Weller M,
   2. van den Bent M,
   3. Tonn JC, et al

   ; European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) Task Force on Gliomas. European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of adult astrocytic and oligodendroglial gliomas. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:e315–29 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30194-8 pmid:28483413

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Omuro A,
   2. DeAngelis LM

   . Glioblastoma and other malignant gliomas: a clinical review. JAMA 2013;310:1842–50 doi:10.1001/jama.2013.280319 pmid:24193082

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Lasocki A,
   2. Gaillard F

   . Non-contrast-enhancing tumor: a new frontier in glioblastoma research. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:758–65 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6025 pmid:30948373

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.
   1. Grabowski MM,
   2. Recinos PF,
   3. Nowacki AS, et al

   . Residual tumor volume versus extent of resection: predictors of survival after surgery for glioblastoma. J Neurosurg 2014;121:1115–23 doi:10.3171/2014.7.JNS132449 pmid:25192475

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Jain R,
   2. Poisson LM,
   3. Gutman D, et al

   . Outcome prediction in patients with glioblastoma by using imaging, clinical, and genomic biomarkers: focus on the nonenhancing component of the tumor. Radiology 2014;272:484–93 doi:10.1148/radiol.14131691 pmid:24646147

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Jain R

    . Measurements of tumor vascular leakiness using DCE in brain tumors: clinical applications. NMR Biomed 2013;26:1042–49 doi:10.1002/nbm.2994 pmid:23832526

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Heye AK,
    2. Culling RD,
    3. Valdes HM, et al

    . Assessment of blood-brain barrier disruption using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a systematic review. Neuroimage Clin 2014;6:262– 74 doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2014.09.002 pmid:25379439

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Thompson G,
    2. Mills SJ,
    3. Coope DJ, et al

    . Imaging biomarkers of angiogenesis and the microvascular environment in cerebral tumours. Br J Radiol 2011;84(Spec No 2):S127–44 doi:10.1259/bjr/66316279 pmid:22433824

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Koh DM,
    2. Collins DJ

    . Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:1622–35 doi:10.2214/AJR.06.1403 pmid:17515386

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Kourou K,
    2. Exarchos TP,
    3. Exarchos KP, et al

    . Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 2015;13:8–17 doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2014.11.005 pmid:25750696

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Heiss WD,
    2. Raab P,
    3. Lanfermann H

    . Multimodality assessment of brain tumors and tumor recurrence. J Nucl Med 2011;52:1585–1600 doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.084210 pmid:21840931

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Macyszyn L,
    2. Akbari H,
    3. Pisapia JM, et al

    . Imaging patterns predict patient survival and molecular subtype in glioblastoma via machine learning techniques. Neuro Oncol 2016;18:417–25 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nov127 pmid:26188015

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Kang Y,
    2. Hong EK,
    3. Rhim JH, et al

    . Prognostic value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI-derived pharmacokinetic variables in glioblastoma patients: analysis of contrast-enhancing lesions and non-enhancing T2 high-signal intensity lesions. Korean J Radiol 2020;21:707–16 doi:10.3348/kjr.2019.0629 pmid:32410409

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Ashabi A,
    2. Sahibuddin SB,
    3. Haghighi MS

    . The systematic review of K-means clustering algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Networks, Communication and Computing, Tokyo, Japan. December 18–20, 2020:13–18 doi:10.1145/3447654.3447657
19. 19.↵
    1. Barnes SR,
    2. Ng TS,
    3. Montagne A, et al

    . Optimal acquisition and modeling parameters for accurate assessment of low K^trans blood-brain barrier permeability using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2016;75:1967–77 doi:10.1002/mrm.25793 pmid:26077645

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Jain R,
    2. Griffith B,
    3. Alotaibi F, et al

    . Glioma angiogenesis and perfusion imaging: understanding the relationship between tumor blood volume and leakiness with increasing glioma grade. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:2030–35 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4405 pmid:26206809

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Lee EJ,
    2. terBrugge K,
    3. Mikulis D, et al

    . Diagnostic value of peritumoral minimum apparent diffusion coefficient for differentiation of glioblastoma multiforme from solitary metastatic lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:71–76 doi:10.2214/AJR.10.4752 pmid:21178049

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    1. Chiang IC,
    2. Kuo YT,
    3. 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;46:619–27 doi:10.1007/s00234-004-1246-7 pmid:15243726

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Yang L,
    2. Lin C,
    3. Wang L, et al

    . Hypoxia and hypoxia-inducible factors in glioblastoma multiforme progression and therapeutic implications. Exp Cell Res 2012;318:2417–26 doi:10.1016/j.yexcr.2012.07.017 pmid:22906859

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.
    1. Kaur B,
    2. Khwaja FW,
    3. Severson EA, et al

    . Hypoxia and the hypoxia-inducible-factor pathway in glioma growth and angiogenesis. Neuro Oncol 2005;7:134–53 doi:10.1215/S1152851704001115 pmid:15831232

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Monteiro AR,
    2. Hill R,
    3. Pilkington GJ, et al

    . The role of hypoxia in glioblastoma invasion. Cells 2017;6:45 doi:10.3390/cells6040045 pmid:29165393

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Rong Y,
    2. Durden DL,
    3. Van Meir EG, et al

    . “Pseudopalisading” necrosis in glioblastoma: a familiar morphologic feature that links vascular pathology, hypoxia, and angiogenesis. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 2006;65:529–39 doi:10.1097/00005072-200606000-00001 pmid:16783163

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Kim R,
    2. Choi SH,
    3. Yun TJ, et al

    . Prognosis prediction of non-enhancing T2 high signal intensity lesions in glioblastoma patients after standard treatment: application of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2017;27:1176–85 doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4464-6 pmid:27357131

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Brat DJ,
    2. Castellano-Sanchez AA,
    3. Hunter SB, et al

    . Pseudopalisades in glioblastoma are hypoxic, express extracellular matrix proteases, and are formed by an actively migrating cell population. Cancer Res 2004;64:920–27 doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-03-2073 pmid:14871821

    Abstract/FREE Full Text