This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the value of spectroscopic and perfusion MRI for glioma grading and for distinguishing glioblastomas from metastases and from CNS lymphomas.
Methods: The authors examined 79 consecutive patients with first detection of a brain neoplasm on nonenhanced CT scans and no therapy prior to evaluation. Spectroscopic MRI; arterial spin-labeling MRI for measuring cerebral blood flow (CBF); first-pass dynamic, susceptibility-weighted, contrast-enhanced MRI for measuring cerebral blood volume; and T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI were performed. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed, and optimum thresholds for tumor classification and glioma grading were determined.
Results: Perfusion MRI had a higher diagnostic performance than spectroscopic MRI. Because of a significantly higher tumor blood flow in glioblastomas compared with CNS lymphomas, a threshold value of 1.2 for CBF provided sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 80%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 94%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 89%. Because CBF was significantly higher in peritumoral nonenhancing T2-hyperintense regions of glioblastomas compared with metastases, a threshold value of 0.5 for CBF provided sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 100%, 71%, 94%, and 100%. Glioblastomas had the highest tumor blood flow values among all other glioma grades. For discrimination of glioblastomas from grade 3 gliomas, sensitivity was 97%, specificity was 50%, PPV was 84%, and NPV was 86% (CBF threshold value of 1.4), and for discrimination of glioblastomas from grade 2 gliomas, sensitivity was 94%, specificity was 78%, PPV was 94%, and NPV was 78% (CBF threshold value of 1.6).
Conclusion: Perfusion MRI is predictive in distinguishing glioblastomas from metastases, CNS lymphomas and other gliomas vs MRI and magnetic resonance spectroscopy.
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
