Search

The standard treatment in glioblastoma includes maximal safe resection followed by concomitant radiotherapy plus chemotherapy and adjuvant temozolomide. The first follow‐up study to evaluate treatment response is performed 1 month after concomitant treatment, when contrast‐enhancing regions may appear that can correspond to true progression or pseudoprogression. We retrospectively evaluated 31 consecutive patients at the first follow‐up after concomitant treatment to check whether the metabolic pattern assessed with multivoxel MRS was predictive of treatment response 2 months later. We extracted the underlying metabolic patterns of the contrast‐enhancing regions with a blind‐source separation method and mapped them over the reference images. Pattern heterogeneity was calculated using entropy, and association between patterns and outcomes was measured with Cramér's V. We identified three distinct metabolic patterns—proliferative, necrotic, and responsive, which were associated with status 2 months later. Individually, 70% of the patients showed metabolically heterogeneous patterns in the contrast‐enhancing regions. Metabolic heterogeneity was not related to the regions' size and only stable patients were less heterogeneous than the rest. Contrast‐enhancing regions are also metabolically heterogeneous 1 month after concomitant treatment. This could explain the reported difficulty in finding robust pseudoprogression biomarkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The development of new drugs for the treatment of progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) highlights the need for new prognostic biomarkers. Phase-rim lesions (PRLs) have been proposed as markers of progressive disease but are difficult to identify and quantify. Previous studies have identified T1-hypointensity in PRLs. The aim of this study was to compare the intensity profiles of PRLs and non-PRL white-matter lesions (nPR-WMLs) on three-dimensional T1-weighted turbo field echo (3DT1TFE) MRI. We then evaluated the performance of a derived metric as a surrogate for PRLs as potential markers for risk of disease progression. Methods: This study enrolled a cohort of relapsing–remitting (n = 10) and secondary progressive MS (n = 10) patients for whom 3 T MRI was available. PRLs and nPR-WMLs were segmented, and voxel-wise normalized T1-intensity histograms were analyzed. The lesions were divided equally into training and test datasets, and the fifth-percentile (p5)-normalized T1-intensity of each lesion was compared between groups and used for classification prediction. Results: Voxel-wise histogram analysis showed a unimodal histogram for nPR-WMLs and a bimodal histogram for PRLs with a large peak in the hypointense limit. Lesion-wise analysis included 1075 nPR-WMLs and 39 PRLs. The p5 intensity of PRLs was significantly lower than that of nPR-WMLs. The T1 intensity-based PRL classifier had a sensitivity of 0.526 and specificity of 0.959. Conclusions: Profound hypointensity on 3DT1TFE MRI is characteristic of PRLs and rare in other white-matter lesions. Given the widespread availability of T1-weighted imaging, this feature might serve as a surrogate biomarker for smoldering inflammation. Clinical relevance statement: Quantitative analysis of 3DT1TFE may detect deeply hypointense voxels in multiple sclerosis lesions, which are highly specific to PRLs. This could serve as a specific indicator of smoldering inflammation in MS, aiding in early detection of disease progression. Key Points: • Phase-rim lesions (PRLs) in multiple sclerosis present a characteristic T1-hypointensity on 3DT1TFE MRI. • Intensity-normalized 3DT1TFE can be used to systematically identify and quantify these deeply hypointense foci. • Deep T1-hypointensity may act as an easily detectable, surrogate marker for PRLs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Proton Magnetic Resonance (MR) Spectroscopy (MRS) is a widely available technique for those clinical centres equipped with MR scanners. Unlike the rest of MR-based techniques, MRS yields not images but spectra of metabolites in the tissues. In pathological situations, the MRS profile changes and this has been particularly described for brain tumours. However, radiologists are frequently not familiar to the interpretation of MRS data and for this reason, the usefulness of decision-support systems (DSS) in MRS data analysis has been explored. Results This work presents the INTERPRET DSS version 3.0, analysing the improvements made from its first release in 2002. Version 3.0 is aimed to be a program that 1st, can be easily used with any new case from any MR scanner manufacturer and 2nd, improves the initial analysis capabilities of the first version. The main improvements are an embedded database, user accounts, more diagnostic discrimination capabilities and the possibility to analyse data acquired under additional data acquisition conditions. Other improvements include a customisable graphical user interface (GUI). Most diagnostic problems included have been addressed through a pattern-recognition based approach, in which classifiers based on linear discriminant analysis (LDA) were trained and tested. Conclusions The INTERPRET DSS 3.0 allows radiologists, medical physicists, biochemists or, generally speaking, any person with a minimum knowledge of what an MR spectrum is, to enter their own SV raw data, acquired at 1.5 T, and to analyse them. The system is expected to help in the categorisation of MR Spectra from abnormal brain masses.