International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine Research

DOI：http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/ijcemr.2021.04.006

Two Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Post-Processing Methods for Differentiating Glioma Grades, IDH Mutation Statuses, and Heterogeneity

Date: March 2,2021 |Hits: 332 Download PDF How to cite this paper

Jie Bai¹, Ankang Gao¹, Yuan Hong², Guohua Zhao¹, Yong Zhang¹, Dexing Kong², Jingliang Cheng^1,*

¹Department of MRI, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.

²School of Mathematical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.

*Corresponding author: Jingliang Cheng

Abstract

Background: To compare the application of two DKI post-processing methods that DKE software and DKI histogram analysis in glioma grading, IDH mutation typing, and evaluation of tumor heterogeneity. Methods: Patients who underwent surgery and were pathologically diagnosed with glioma after MR DKI scan. DKE software was used to calculate diffusion parameters, including fractional anisotropy, mean kurtosis (MK), radial kurtosis, and axial kurtosis. Histogram parameters were calculated, including minimum, maximum, mean, standard deviation, percentile values (25th, 50th, 75th, 95th), kurtosis, and skewness of Kapp and Dapp. The ROIs of the two post-processing methods were consistently and manually selected in continuous solid tumor regions. According to the result of Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test, Independent-samples T test or Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test was used to distinguish glioma grads. The parameters with the best percentile were identified by analysis of the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: Seventy-three patients with glioma were observed, including 21 with low-grade gliomas (WHOII) and 52 with high-grade gliomas (WHO III, n = 13: WHO IV, n = 39), 38 of whom had IDH mutation status. There were significant differences between the high- and low-grade glioma groups regarding the maximum, mean, standard deviation, C75, and C95 of the Kapp values and the minimum, mean, C25, C50, C75, C95, and skewness of the Dapp values. The MK values were significantly different among the WHO II, III, and IV grades. MK, mean Kapp, and C75 and C95 of the Kapp could be used to predict IDH mutations in patients with glioma. Conclusions: Several quantitative DKI parameters obtained from the DKE software and histogram analysis could be used for glioma grading and predicting IDH mutations. However, DKI histogram analysis was useful for glioma heterogeneity.

References

[1] Louis, D. N., Perry, A., Reifenberger, G., et al. (2016). The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol, 2016, 131: 803-820.

[2] Fengjia Li, Yue Zhang, Naiwu Wang, et al. (2020). Evaluation of the Prognosis of Neuroglioma Based on Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Enhancement. World Neurosurgery, 2020, S1878-8750.

[3] Dahlrot, R. H. (2014). The prognostic value of clinical factors and cancer stem cell-related markers in gliomas. Dan Med J., 2014, 61: B4944.

[4] Ampie, L., Choy, W., Lamano, J. B., et al. (2015). Prognostic factors for recurrence and complications in the surgical management of primary chordoid gliomas: asystematic review of literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg, 2015, 138: 129-136.

[5] Chicklore, S., Goh, V., Siddique, M., et al. (2013). Quantifying tumour heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging by texture analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2013, 40: 133‐140.

[6] Ganeshan, B., Goh, V., Mandeville, H. C., et al. (2013). Non-small cell lung cancer: histopathologic correlates for texture pa-rameters at CT. Radiology, 2013, 266: 326‐336.

[7] Jensen, J. H., Helpern, J. A., Ramani, A., et al. (2005). Diffusional kurtosis imaging: The quantification of non‐gaussian water diffusion by means of magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2005, 53: 1432.

[8] Raab, P., Hattingen, E., Franz, K., et al. (2010). Cerebral Gliomas: Diffusional Kurtosis Imaging Analysis of Microstructural Differences. Radiology, 2010, 254: 876-881.

[9] Tabesh, A., Jensen, J. H., Ardekani, B. A., et al. (2011). Estimation of tensors and tensor-derived measures in diffusional kurtosis imaging. Magn Reson Med., 2011, 65: 823-836.

[10] Hui, E. S., Cheung, M. M., Qi, L., et al. (2008). Towards better MR characterization of neural tissues using directional diffusion kurtosis analysis. NeuroImage, 2008, 42: 122-134.

[11] Falk Delgado A., Nilsson M., van Westen D., et al. (2018). Glioma Grade Discrimination with MR Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy. Radiology, 2018, 287: 119-127.

[12] Zhang, J., Jiang, J., Zhao, L., et al. (2019). Survival prediction of high-grade glioma patients with diffusion kurtosis imaging. Am J Transl Res., 2019, 11: 3680-3688.

[13] Zhao, J., Wang, Y. L., Li, X. B., et al. (2019). Comparative analysis of the diﬀusion kurtosis imaging and diﬀusion tensor im-aging in grading gliomas, predicting tumour cell proliferation and IDH-1 gene mutation status. J Neurooncol, 2019, 141: 195-203.

[14] Just, N. (2014). Improving tumour heterogeneity MRI assessment with histograms. Br J Cancer, 2014, 111: 2205‐2213.

[15] Raja, R., Sinha, N., Saini, J., et al. (2016). Assessment of tissue heterogeneity using diffusion tensor and diffusion kurtosis imaging for grading gliomas. Neuroradiology, 2016, 58: 1217‐1231.

[16] Jakab, A., Molnár, P., Emri, M., et al. (2011). Glioma grade assessment by using histogram analysis of diffusion tensor imag-ing-derived maps. Neuroradiology, 2011, 53: 483-491.

[17] Garzón, B., Emblem, K. E., Mouridsen, K., et al. (2011). Multiparametric analysis of magnetic resonance images for glioma grading and patient survival time prediction. Acta Radiologica, 2011, 52: 1052-1060.

[18] Kim, H., Choi, S. H., Kim, J. H., et al. (2013). Gliomas: application of cumulative histogram analysis of normalized cerebral blood volume on 3 T MRI to tumor grading. Plos One, 2013, 8: e63462.

[19] Hempel, J. M., Schittenhelm, J., Brendle, C., et al. (2017). Histogram analysis of diffusion kurtosis imaging estimates for in vivo assessment of 2016 WHO glioma grades: A cross-sectional observational study. European Journal of Radiology, 2017, 95: 202-211.

[20] Qi, X. X., Shi, D. F., Ren, S. X., et al. (2018). Histogram analysis of diffusion kurtosis imaging derived maps may distinguish between low and high grade gliomas before surgery. Eur Radiol, 2018, 28: 1748-1755.

[21] Hempel, J. M., Brendle, C., Bender, B. (2019). Diﬀusion kurtosis imaging histogram parameter metrics predicting survival in integrated molecular subtypes of diﬀuse glioma: An observational cohort study. Eur J Radiol, 2019, 112: 144-152.

[22] Xie, H., Wu, G. (2018). Application of Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging and Histogram Analysis for Assessing Preoperative Stages of Rectal Cancer. Gastroenterol Res Pract, 2018: 9786932.

[23] Xu, X. Q., Ma, G., Wang, Y. J., et al. (2017). Histogram analysis of diffusion kurtosis imaging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Correlation between quantitative parameters and clinical stage. Oncotarget, 2017, 8: 47230-47238.

[24] Li, T., Hong, Y., Kong, D., et al. (2020). Histogram analysis of diffusion kurtosis imaging based on whole-volume images of breast lesions. J MagnReson Imaging, 2020, 51: 627‐634.

[25] Rosenkrantz, A. B., Padhani, A. R., Chenevert, T. L., et al. (2015). Body Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging: Basic Principles, Appli-cations, and Considerations for Clinical Practice. J MagnReson Imaging, 2015, 42: 1190-202.

[26] Rose, S., Fay, M., Thomas, P., et al. (2013). Correlation of MRI-derived apparent diffusion coefficients in newly diagnosed gliomas with [18F]- fluoro-L-dopa PET: what are we really measuring with minimum ADC? AJNR, 2013, 34: 758-764.

[27] Maier, S. E., Sun, Y., Mulkern, R. V. (2010). Diffusion imaging of brain tumors. NMR Biomed, 2010, 23: 849-864.

[28] Tietze, A., Hansen, M. B., Ostergaard, L., et al. (2015). Mean diffusional kurtosis in patients with glioma: initial results with a fast imaging method in a clinical setting. AJNR, 2015, 6: 1472-1478.

[29] Jensen, J. H., Helpern, J. A., Ramani, A., et al. (2005). Diffusional kurtosis imaging: the quantification of non-gaussian water diffusion by means of magnetic resonance imaging. MagnReson Med., 2005, 53: 1432-1440.

[30] Van Cauter, S., Veraart, J., Sijbers, J., et al. (2012). Gliomas: diffusion kurtosis MR imaging in grading. Radiology, 2012, 263: 492-501.

[31] Lee, H. Y., Na, D. G., Song, I. C., et al. (2008). Diffusion-tensor imaging for glioma grading at 3-T magnetic resonance imaging: analysis of fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2008, 32: 298-303.

[32] Bai, Y., Lin, Y., Tian, J., et al. (2016). Grading of gliomas by Using Monoexponential, Biexponential, and stretched exponential Diffusion-weighted MR imaging and Diffusion Kurtosis MR imaging. Radiology, 2016, 278: 496-504.

[33] Tietze, A., Hansen, M. B., Østergaard, L., et al. (2015). Mean Diffusional Kurtosis in Patients with Glioma: Initial Results with a Fast Imaging Method in a Clinical Setting. AJNR, 2015, 36: 1472-1478.

[34] Wu, E. X., Cheung, M. M. (2010). MR diﬀusion kurtosis imaging for neural tissue characterization. NMR Biomed, 2010, 23: 836-848.

[35] Jiang, R., Jiang, J., Zhao, L., et al. (2015). Diffusion kurtosis imaging can effciently assess the glioma grade and cellular proli-feration. Oncotarget, 2015, 6: 42380-42393.

How to cite this paper

Two Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Post-Processing Methods for Differentiating Glioma Grades, IDH Mutation Statuses, and Heterogeneity

How to cite this paper: Jie Bai, Ankang Gao, Yuan Hong, Guohua Zhao, Yong Zhang, Dexing Kong, Jingliang Cheng. (2021) Two Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Post-Processing Methods for Differentiating Glioma Grades, IDH Mutation Statuses, and Heterogeneity. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine Research, 5(2), 127-134.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/ijcemr.2021.04.006

Volumes & Issues

Volume 5 (2021)

Volume 4 (2020)

Volume 3 (2019)

Volume 2 (2018)

Volume 1 (2017)

Free HPG Newsletters

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from Hill Publishing Group.

More Journals

Contact us

Hill Publishing Group

8825 53rd Ave

Elmhurst, NY 11373, USA

E-mail: contact@hillpublisher.com