LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Perfusion parameters derived from MRI for preoperative prediction of IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation status in glioblastomas.

Photo from wikipedia

PURPOSE To investigate the feasibility for preoperative prediction of IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation status in glioblastomas(GBMs) by intravoxel incoherent motion(IVIM) and dynamic susceptibility contrast(DSC). METHODS Preoperative IVIM and… Click to show full abstract

PURPOSE To investigate the feasibility for preoperative prediction of IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation status in glioblastomas(GBMs) by intravoxel incoherent motion(IVIM) and dynamic susceptibility contrast(DSC). METHODS Preoperative IVIM and DSC images of 71 patients(IDH mutation:45, IDH wildtype: 26; MGMT methylation: 31, MGMT unmethylation:40) with glioblastomas were analyzed retrospectively. Perfusion parameters including microcirculation perfusion coefficient(D*), perfusion fraction(f), cerebral blood volume(CBV) and cerebral blood flow(CBF) were measured. Corrected perfusion parameters containing corrected perfusion coefficient(ADCperf) and simplified perfusion fraction(SPF) were from the simplified IVIM with 3 b values. Correlations among parameters were analyzed by Spearman correlation. All parameters were compared with Mann-Whitney U test. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were constructed. The receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curve was analyzed. RESULTS The IVIM parameters showed merely moderate correlations with CBV and showed no correlation with CBF. IDH mutation GBMs showed lower D*, ADCperf, SPF, CBV and higher f than IDH wildtype GBMs(all p < 0.05). D* was the independent predictor for IDH mutation with the highest AUC of 0.912(95%CI: 0.821-0.966). The D*, ADCperf, SPF and CBV of MGMT promoter methylation GBMs were lower than unmethylation GBMs while f was higher(all p < 0.05). Multivariate model showed the highest prediction efficacy for MGMT promoter methylation with an AUC of 0.915(95%CI: 0.824-0.968). The CBF was not useful in distinguishing IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation status(p = 0.055, 0.215). CONCLUSION IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation status in GBMs can be assessed effectively by IVIM and DSC. Besides, D* was the independent predictor of IDH mutation status.

Keywords: idh mutation; mgmt promoter; promoter methylation; mutation

Journal Title: Magnetic resonance imaging
Year Published: 2021

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.