Hemant Parmar1, Daniel Wahl2, Priyanka Pramanik2, Michelle Kim2, Theodore S Lawrence2, and Yue Cao1,2
1Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States, 2Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
Synopsis
Standard imaging for glioblastoma relies on post-contrast T1
and T2 FLAIR MRI sequences, which do not accurately reflect tumor biology. Advanced
MRI techniques can define biologically relevant and prognostic features of glioblastoma
including perfusion-based volumes with high cerebral blood volume (VhCBV)
and high b-value diffusion-based hypercellular subvolume (HCV). We defined VhCBV
and HCV in 24 patients with glioblastoma prior to undergoing
chemoradiation. Surprisingly, there was little overlap between VhCBV
and HCV within individual patients, which suggests that these volumes represent
distinct aspects of tumor biology and may be independently prognostic. Analysis
of failure patterns and prognostic relevance is ongoing.Introduction
Tumor volumes of glioblastoma
(GBM) defined on post-contrast T1 weighted and T2 FLAIR images underestimate
and overestimate gross tumor volume, respectively, resulting in inadequate
target definition for surgery and radiation therapy. However, elevated CBV in GBM is an
established biomarker for prognosis.1-3 Recent work also shows that the
hypercellularity abnormality subvolume (HCV) and non-enhanced HCV in GBM
identified by high b-value diffusion weighted imaging are significant prognostic
indicators.4 To what extent elevated CBV and HCV are complementary
or redundant is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the spatial
relationship between elevated CBV and HCV and whether combining them leads to
better radiation target definition and prediction for outcomes.
Methods
The
study was approved by IRB. Twenty-four patients (age: 24-77 years) with newly
diagnosed GBM had MRI scans prior to concurrent chemoradiation therapy (RT). All
MRI scans were performed on a 3T scanner (Skyra, Siemens). Scans included T1 weighted pre- and
post-contrast, T2 FLAIR, T1 weighted dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE), and
diffusion weighted (DW) images. CBV maps
were computed by fitting the generalized Toft model to the DCE images that were
acquired with temporal resolution of ~3 s at ~2mm isotropic voxel size. DW images were acquired in 3 orthogonal
directions with b-values of 0, 1000, and 3000 s/mm
2. Using the high b-value (3000) DW images, in
which fluid, edema, grey matter, and white matter for an extent are suppressed,
the HCV of each patient was determined by a threshold (mean intensity + 2SD) obtained
from a VOI in normal appearing tissue and contralateral to the tumor. Similarly, the high CBV volume in GBM (V
hCBV)
was determined by a threshold (mean + 1 SD) obtained in contralateral grey
matter. After co-registration of CBV, DW,
FLAIR, post-contrast T1-weighted images pre RT, planned dose volumes and MRI at
recurrence, spatial overlapping between the V
hCBV and HCV in GBM as
well as with the gross tumor volume (GTV_Gd) on Gd-enhanced T1 weighted images,
abnormality volume on FLAIR images, 95% radiation dose volume and pattern of
failure were compared. A Jaccard
similarity index was used to quantify the spatial overlap between the V
hCBV
and HCV.
Results
Of the 24 patients, the V
hCBV
varied from 0.1 to 66 cc with a median of 5.5 cc, and the HCV from 0.1 to 66 cc
with a median of 7.6 cc. Both were much
smaller than tumor volumes obtained from FLAIR images (a median of 63 cc with a
range from 17.8 to 180 cc). There was
little overlap between V
hCBV
and HCV, with overlapping volumes ranging from 0 to 4.4 cc with a median
of 0.9 cc, resulting in a median Jaccard similarity index of 7.9% (range: 0 to
50%). Only five patients had the Jaccard
index greater than 20% (Fig. 1), suggesting the V
hCBV and HCV represent
different aspects of tumor biology or phenotype. Combining the V
hCBV and HCV into a
single volume led to a median of 13.4 cc (range: 2.6 to 92 cc), which was much
smaller than the FLAIR tumor volume and had a similar volume to the GTV-Gd (a
median of 27.5 cc and a range from 2.3 to 93.9 cc).
Conclusion
Our data suggest that elevated CBV and hypercellularity in GBM represent two different tumor
properties. Both should be considered for tumor response assessment. Combining the two should be considered as a
target for intensification radiation therapy.
The evaluation of the predictive power of combining these two imaging
biomarkers on clinical outcomes is ongoing.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported in part by NIH/NINDS/NCI RO1 NS064973 (Cao).References
1. Cao et al, Int J Rad Onc Biol Phys, 64(3):876-885, 2006.
2. Law et al Radiology, 247(2):490-498, 2008.
3. Jain et al Radiology, 267(1): 212-220, 2013.
4. Pramanik et al, Int J Rad Onc Biol Phys, 92(4):811-819, 2015.