Fatemeh Arzanforoosh1, Sebastian R. Van Der Voort1,2, Fatih Incekara1,3, Arnaud J. P. Vincent 3, Martin Van den Bent2,3, Marion Smits1,2, and Esther A.H. Warnert1,2
1Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 3Department of Neurology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands
Synopsis
Deep insight about
tumor microvasculature is important for diagnosis and prognosis of glioma patients.
Relative Cerebral Blood Volume (rCBV) and vessel size are two parameters,
derived from perfusion MRI, used for evaluation of tumor microvasculature in
glioma. In this study, we investigated the clinical value of both rCBV and
vessel size and their correlation for three subgroups of glioma based on the
recent 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) classification scheme. The result
showed that neither rCBV nor vessel size differed significantly between glioma
subtypes, though correlation of these two parameters sheds light on the
microvasculature characteristics of each subgroup.
Background and Purpose:
The creation of new blood vessels, angiogenesis, plays a critical
role in glioma development. The formation of irregular vasculature is not only
varying between various glioma subtypes, but changes in the underlying
vasculature can also herald malignant transformation (1). In particular in light of the recent 2021 WHO classification
scheme, early and accurate diagnosis of glioma or malignant transformation is
of utmost importance for prognosis and treatment decision making.
The most commonly assessed imaging biomarker of tumor vasculature
is rCBV coming from dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI. Although
previous work illustrated that increased rCBV corresponds to increased
malignancy in diffuse glioma, in practice this does not hold when
oligodendroglioma - as defined in the WHO 2021 classification
scheme - are included (2). This type of tumor is known for its “chicken wire” vasculature,
which in turn can lead to high rCBV values (3).
When extending DSC MRI to assess simultaneous acquisition of T2
and T2* weighted images
to follow the passage of a gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA) through the
cerebral vasculature, vessel size imaging (VSI) can be done, that has the
potential to add information about microvascular structure. We explored using VSI in addition to rCBV to assess three
diffuse glioma subtypes present within the WHO 2021 glioma classification.
Materials and Methods:
A retrospective dataset consisting of 38 patients with confirmed
non-enhancing glioma was used and classified in three groups: Oligo/IDHMUT&1p/19q-,
Astro/IDHMUT, and
Glioblastoma/IDHWT
(4). All
patients underwent 3T MRI scanning (GE, Milwaukee, WI, USA) prior to surgery.
For DSC MRI, Hybrid EPI (HEPI) was used with following parameters: 122
repetitions, TR: 1500 ms, FOV: 15 slices, voxel size: 1.88x1.88x4.00 mm3,
TE(GRE): 18.6 ms and TE(SE): 69 ms, with administration of 7.5 ml of GBCA
(Gadovist, Bayer, Leverkusen, GE). A pre-load bolus of equal size was
administrated 5 minutes before the DSC scan was acquired. Diffusion weighted
imaging (2 b-values: 0, 1000 s/mm2, voxel size: 1x1x3 mm3
and TE/TR of 63/5000 ms) was done to estimate the apparent diffusion
coefficient (ADC) required for VSI. High resolution T1-weighed pre- and
post-contrast (voxel size: 1x1x0.5 mm3; TE/TR: 2.1/6.1 ms), T2
(voxel size: 0.5x0.5x3.2 mm3; TE/TR: 107/10000 ms), and FLAIR (voxel
size: 0.6x0.5x0.5 mm3; TE/TR: 106/6000 ms) images were acquired and
used for tumor segmentation.
Estimates
of mean vessel size and normalized rCBV maps were made according to previously
described methods (5,6).
HD-GLIO was used to generate tumor regions of interest (ROI) for all patient (7).
Average tumor vessel size, normalized rCBV, and ADC were calculated for each
group of patients. Additionally, correlation analysis
was performed between rCBV and vessel size for each subgroup.
Results: Patient information is summarized in
Table 1. Figure 1 shows an example
slice of ADC, rCBV and vessel size maps for three patients, each selected from one
subgroup. The average of the microvascular parameters (rCBV, vessel size) and
ADC are presented in figure 2 for each patient and each group. In Oligo/IDHMUT&1p/19q-,
rCBV was significantly higher compared to Astro/IDHMUT (p
< 0.05, unpaired t-test), but equal to Glioblastoma/IDHWT. A trend of
increased vessel size was found for Oligo/IDHMUT&1p/19q- and Astro/IDHMUT compared to Glioblastoma/IDHWT, but no significant
differences were found. Vessel size and rCBV showed strong correlation in Glioblastoma/IDHWT (r=0.82, p=0.02), moderate correlation
in Oligo/IDHMUT&1p/19q-
(r=0.56, p=0.01) and no correlation
in Astro/IDHMUT (r=0.17, p=0.57) (Fig. 3).
Discussion: The result of this study on
nonenhancing glioma suggests that rCBV and vessel size alone cannot distinguish
between three subgroups based on the 2021 WHO guidelines. However, combining
these two parameters and measuring the correlation of these two parameters
sheds light on the microvasculature characteristics of each subgroup.
Intuitively it might be expected that vessel size and rCBV are
positively correlated, however this correlation is modulated by the vessel
density. In other words, in an area with densely packed microvessels, slight
change in vessel diameters can result in a considerable change in rCBV, whereas
in an area with low vessel density, change in vessel diameters may lead to no
or limited change in rCBV. Oligo/IDHMUT&1p/19q-
with high rCBV and high VSI showing a moderate relationship between these two
parameters, might be reflecting high vessel density. Low density might be
present within the Astro/IDHMUT,
as we see no correlation - while in Glioblastoma/IDHWT our findings indicate high vessel density. Note
that this would be in line with the histopathological findings in (3).
Future work validating these results should include histology
measurements of vessel size and mean vessel density of targeted biopsies of
tumor tissue based on rCBV and vessel size and investigation of the clinical
applicability of VSI in glioma imaging diagnostics. Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Lebelt
A, Dziecioł J, Guzińska-Ustymowicz K, Lemancewicz D, Zimnoch L, Czykier E.
Angiogenesis in gliomas. Folia Histochem Cytobiol (2008) 46:
doi:10.2478/v10042-008-0009-4
2. Louis DN,
Perry A, Wesseling P, Brat DJ, Cree IA, Figarella-Branger D, Hawkins C, Ng HK,
Pfister SM, Reifenberger G, et al. The 2021 WHO Classification of Tumors of the
Central Nervous System: a summary. Neuro Oncol (2021) 23:1231–1251.
doi:10.1093/neuonc/noab106
3. Guo H, Kang
H, Tong H, Du X, Liu H, Tan Y, Yang Y, Wang S, Zhang W. Microvascular
characteristics of lower-grade diffuse gliomas: investigating vessel size
imaging for differentiating grades and subtypes. Eur Radiol (2019) 29:1893–1902.
doi:10.1007/s00330-018-5738-y
4. van der
Voort SR, Incekara F, Wijnenga MMJ, Kapas G, Gardeniers M, Schouten JW,
Starmans MPA, Tewarie RN, Lycklama GJ, French PJ, et al. Predicting the 1p/19q
codeletion status of presumed low-grade glioma with an externally validated
machine learning algorithm. Clin Cancer Res (2019)
doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-1127
5. Arzanforoosh
F, Croal PL, van Garderen KA, Smits M, Chappell MA, Warnert EAH. Effect of
Applying Leakage Correction on rCBV Measurement Derived From DSC-MRI in Enhancing
and Nonenhancing Glioma. Front Oncol (2021) 11:
doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.648528
6. Kiselev VG,
Strecker R, Ziyeh S, Speck O, Hennig J. Vessel size imaging in humans. Magn
Reson Med (2005) 53:553–563. doi:10.1002/mrm.20383
7. Kickingereder P, Isensee F,
Tursunova I, Petersen J, Neuberger U, Bonekamp D, Brugnara G, Schell M, Kessler
T, Foltyn M, et al. Automated quantitative tumour response assessment of MRI in
neuro-oncology with artificial neural networks: a multicentre, retrospective
study. Lancet Oncol (2019) 20:728–740.
doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30098-1