Presurgical Identification of Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma with Normalized Time-Intensity Curve: A Pilot Study of a New Method to Analyze DSC-PWI

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Chiavazza C,
   2. Pellerino A,
   3. Ferrio F, et al

   . Primary CNS lymphomas: challenges in diagnosis and monitoring. Biomed Res Int 2018;2018:3606970 doi:10.1155/2018/3606970 pmid:30035121

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Altwairgi AK,
   2. Raja S,
   3. Manzoor M, et al

   . Management and treatment recommendations for World Health Organization grade III and IV gliomas. Int J Health Sci (Qassim) 2017;11:54–62 pmid:28936153

   PubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Enrique GV,
   2. Irving SR,
   3. Ricardo BI, et al

   . Diagnosis and management of brain metastases: an updated review from a radiation oncology perspective. J Cancer Metastasis Treat 2019;5:54 doi:10.20517/2394-4722.2019.20

   CrossRef
4. 4.↵
   1. Euskirchen P,
   2. Peyre M

   . Management of meningioma. Presse Med 2018;47:e245–52 doi:10.1016/j.lpm.2018.05.016 pmid:30449639

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Tang YZ,
   2. Booth TC,
   3. Bhogal P, et al

   . Imaging of primary central nervous system lymphoma. Clin Radiol 2011;66:768–77 doi:10.1016/j.crad.2011.03.006 pmid:21513925

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Giannini C,
   2. Dogan A,
   3. Salomão DR

   . et al. CNS lymphoma. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 2014;73:478–94 doi:10.1097/NEN.0000000000000076 pmid:24806301

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Bühring U,
   2. Herrlinger U,
   3. Krings T, et al

   . MRI features of primary central nervous system lymphomas at presentation. Neurology 2001;57:393–96 doi:10.1212/wnl.57.3.393 pmid:11515505

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Upadhyay N,
   2. Waldman AD

   . Conventional MRI evaluation of gliomas. Br J Radiol 2011;84:84 Spec No 2(Spec Iss 2);S107–11 doi:10.1259/bjr/65711810

   CrossRef
9. 9.↵
   1. Fink K,
   2. Fink J

   . Imaging of brain metastases. Surg Neurol Int 2013;4:209 doi:10.4103/2152-7806.111298

   CrossRef
10. 10.↵
    1. Watts J,
    2. Box G,
    3. Galvin A, et al

    . Magnetic resonance imaging of meningiomas: a pictorial review. Insights Imaging 2014;5:113–22 doi:10.1007/s13244-013-0302-4 pmid:24399610

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Huang RY,
    2. Bi WL,
    3. Griffith B, et al

    ; International Consortium on Meningiomas. Imaging and diagnostic advances for intracranial meningiomas. Neuro Oncol 2019;21:i44–61 doi:10.1093/neuonc/noy143 pmid:30649491

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Lee MD,
    2. Baird GL,
    3. Bell LC, et al

    . Utility of percentage signal recovery and baseline signal in DSC-MRI optimized for relative CBV measurement for differentiating glioblastoma, lymphoma, metastasis, and meningioma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:1145–50 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6153 pmid:31371360

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Xing Z,
    2. You RX,
    3. Li J, et al

    . Differentiation of primary central nervous system lymphomas from high-grade gliomas by rCBV and percentage of signal intensity recovery derived from dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. Clin Neuroradiol 2014;24:329–36 doi:10.1007/s00062-013-0255-5 pmid:23994941

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Liang R,
    2. Li M,
    3. Wang X, et al

    . Role of rCBV values derived from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in differentiating CNS lymphoma from high grade glioma: a meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med 2014;7:5573–77 pmid:25664074

    PubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Neska-Matuszewska M,
    2. Bladowska J,
    3. Sąsiadek M, et al

    . Differentiation of glioblastoma multiforme, metastases and primary central nervous system lymphomas using multiparametric perfusion and diffusion MR imaging of a tumor core and a peritumoral zone: searching for a practical approach. PLoS One 2018;13:e0191341 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191341 pmid:29342201

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Xu W,
    2. Wang Q,
    3. Shao A, et al

    . The performance of MR perfusion-weighted imaging for the differentiation of high-grade glioma from primary central nervous system lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017;12:e0173430 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0173430 pmid:28301491

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Wang S,
    2. Kim S,
    3. Chawla S, et al

    . Differentiation between glioblastomas, solitary brain metastases, and primary cerebral lymphomas using diffusion tensor and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:507–14 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2333 pmid:21330399

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    1. Lee IH,
    2. Kim ST,
    3. Kim HJ, et al

    . Analysis of perfusion weighted image of CNS lymphoma. Eur J Radiol 2010;76:48–51 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.013 pmid:19500931

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Calli C,
    2. Kitis O,
    3. Yunten N, et al

    . Perfusion and diffusion MR imaging in enhancing malignant cerebral tumors. Eur J Radiol 2006;58:394–403 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.12.032 pmid:16527438

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Mangla R,
    2. Kolar B,
    3. Zhu T, et al

    . Percentage signal recovery derived from MR dynamic susceptibility contrast imaging is useful to differentiate common enhancing malignant lesions of the brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1004–10 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2441 pmid:21511863

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Chinchure S,
    2. Thomas B,
    3. Wangju S, et al

    . Mean intensity curve on dynamic contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted perfusion MR imaging: review of a new parameter to differentiate intracranial tumors. J Neuroradiol 2011;38:199–206 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2011.07.002 pmid:21943571

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Welker K,
    2. Boxerman J,
    3. Kalnin A, et al

    ; American Society of Functional Neuroradiology MR Perfusion Standards and Practice Subcommittee of the ASFNR Clinical Practice Committee. ASFNR Recommendations for Clinical Performance of MR Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Perfusion Imaging of the Brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:E41–51 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4341 pmid:25907520

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    1. Willats L,
    2. Calamante F

    . The 39 steps: evading error and deciphering the secrets for accurate dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. NMR Biomed 2013;26:913–31 doi:10.1002/nbm.2833 pmid:22782914

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Paulson ES,
    2. Schmainda KM

    . Comparison of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR methods: recommendations for measuring relative cerebral blood volume in brain tumors. Radiology 2008;249:601–13 doi:10.1148/radiol.2492071659 pmid:18780827

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Fedorov A,
    2. Beichel R,
    3. Kalpathy-Cramer J, et al

    . 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:1323–41 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001 pmid:22770690

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Johnson H,
    2. Harris G,
    3. Williams K

    . BRAINSFit: mutual information rigid registrations of whole-brain 3D images, using the insight toolkit. 2009. https://www.nitrc.org/docman/view.php/52/639/BRAINSFit.pdf. Accessed October 1, 2019
27. 27.↵
    1. Hu LS,
    2. Baxter LC,
    3. Pinnaduwage DS, et al

    . Optimized preload leakage-correction methods to improve the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging in posttreatment gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:40–48 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1787 pmid:19749223

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Cha S,
    2. Lupo JM,
    3. Chen MH, et al

    . Differentiation of glioblastoma multiforme and single brain metastasis by peak height and percentage of signal intensity recovery derived from dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1078–84 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0484 pmid:17569962

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    R Foundation. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2020. http://www.r-project.org/. Accessed October 15, 2019
30. 30.↵
    1. Korfiatis P,
    2. Erickson B

    . The basics of diffusion and perfusion imaging in brain tumors. Appl Radiol 2014;43:22–29 pmid:26456989

    PubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Boxerman JL,
    2. Paulson ES,
    3. Prah MA, et al

    . The effect of pulse sequence parameters and contrast agent dose on percentage signal recovery in DSC-MRI: implications for clinical applications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1364–69 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3477 pmid:23413249

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    1. Qian L,
    2. Tomuleasa C,
    3. Florian I-A, et al

    . Advances in the treatment of newly diagnosed primary central nervous system lymphomas. Blood Res 2017;52:159–66 doi:10.5045/br.2017.52.3.159 pmid:29043230

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Hoang-Xuan K,
    2. Bessell E,
    3. Bromberg J, et al

    ; European Association for Neuro-Oncology Task Force on Primary CNS Lymphoma. Diagnosis and treatment of primary CNS lymphoma in immunocompetent patients: guidelines from the European Association for Neuro-Oncology. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:e322–32 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00076-5 pmid:26149884

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Önder E,
    2. Arıkök AT,
    3. Önder S, et al

    . Corticosteroid pre-treated primary CNS lymphoma: a detailed analysis of stereotactic biopsy findings and consideration of interobserver variability. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2015;8:7798–808 pmid:26339344

    PubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Weller M,
    2. Martus P,
    3. Roth P, et al

    ; German PCNSL Study Group. Surgery for primary CNS lymphoma? Challenging a paradigm. Neuro Oncol 2012;14:1481–84 doi:10.1093/neuonc/nos159 pmid:22984018

    CrossRefPubMed