Dataset Information

Repeatability of Standardized and Normalized Relative CBV in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background and purpose

For more widespread clinical use advanced imaging methods such as relative cerebral blood volume must be both accurate and repeatable. The aim of this study was to determine the repeatability of relative CBV measurements in newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme by using several of the most commonly published estimation techniques.

Materials and methods

The relative CBV estimates were calculated from dynamic susceptibility contrast MR imaging in double-baseline examinations for 33 patients with treatment-naïve and pathologically proved glioblastoma multiforme (men = 20; mean age = 55 years). Normalized and standardized relative CBV were calculated by using 6 common postprocessing methods. The repeatability of both normalized and standardized relative CBV, in both tumor and contralateral brain, was examined for each method with metrics of repeatability, including the repeatability coefficient and within-subject coefficient of variation. The minimum sample size required to detect a parameter change of 10% or 20% was also determined for both normalized relative CBV and standardized relative CBV for each estimation method.

Results

When ordered by the repeatability coefficient, methods using postprocessing leakage correction and ΔR2*(t) techniques offered superior repeatability. Across processing techniques, the standardized relative CBV repeatability in normal-appearing brain was comparable with that in tumor (P = .31), yet inferior in tumor for normalized relative CBV (P = .03). On the basis of the within-subject coefficient of variation, tumor standardized relative CBV estimates were less variable (13%-20%) than normalized relative CBV estimates (24%-67%). The minimum number of participants needed to detect a change of 10% or 20% is 118-643 or 30-161 for normalized relative CBV and 109-215 or 28-54 for standardized relative CBV.

Conclusions

The ΔR2* estimation methods that incorporate leakage correction offer the best repeatability for relative CBV, with standardized relative CBV being less variable and requiring fewer participants to detect a change compared with normalized relative CBV.

SUBMITTER: Prah MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4567906 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGlioblastoma is the most common primary malignant brain tumor. Recent studies have shown that hematological biomarkers have become a powerful tool for predicting the prognosis of patients with cancer. However, most studies have only investigated the prognostic value of unilateral hematological markers. Therefore, we aimed to establish a comprehensive prognostic scoring system containing hematological markers to improve the prognostic prediction in patients with glioblastoma.Patients and methodsA total of 326 patients with glioblastoma were randomly divided into a training set and external validation set to develop and validate a hematological-related prognostic scoring system (HRPSS). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to determine the optimal covariates that constructed the scoring system. Furthermore, a quantitative survival-predicting nomogram was constructed based on the hematological risk score (HRS) derived from the HRPSS. The results of the nomogram were validated using bootstrap resampling and the external validation set. Finally, we further explored the relationship between the HRS and clinical prognostic factors.ResultsThe optimal cutoff value for the HRS was 0.839. The patients were successfully classified into different prognostic groups based on their HRSs (P < 0.001). The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the HRS were 0.67, 0.73, and 0.78 at 0.5, 1, and 2 years, respectively. Additionally, the 0.5-, 1-y, and 2-y AUCs of the HRS were 0.51, 0.70, and 0.79, respectively, which validated the robust prognostic performance of the HRS in the external validation set. Based on both univariate and multivariate analyses, the HRS possessed a strong ability to predict overall survival in both the training set and validation set. The nomogram based on the HRS displayed good discrimination with a C-index of 0.81 and good calibration. In the validation cohort, a high C-index value of 0.82 could still be achieved. In all the data, the HRS showed specific correlations with age, first presenting symptoms, isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation status and tumor location, and successfully stratified them into different risk subgroups.ConclusionsThe HRPSS is a powerful tool for accurate prognostic prediction in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of prolonging temozolomide (TMZ) maintenance beyond six cycles in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) remains a topic of discussion. We investigated the effects of prolonged TMZ maintenance on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).Patients and methodsIn this retrospective single-center cohort study, we included patients with GBM who were treated with radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant TMZ. For analysis, patients were considered who either completed six TMZ maintenance cycles (group B), continued with TMZ therapy beyond six cycles (group C), or stopped TMZ maintenance therapy within the first six cycles (group A). Patients with progression during the first six TMZ maintenance cycles were excluded.ResultsClinical data from 107 patients were included for Kaplan-Meier analyses and 102 for Cox regressions. Median PFS times were 8.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.1-12.4) in group A, 13.7 months (95% CI 10.6-17.5) in group B, and 20.9 months (95% CI 15.2-43.5) in group C. At first progression, response rates of TMZ/lomustine rechallenge were 47% in group B and 13% in group C. Median OS times were 12.7 months (95% CI 10.3-16.8) in group A, 25.2 months (95% CI 17.7-55.5) in group B, and 28.6 months (95% CI 24.4-open) in group C. Nevertheless, multivariate Cox regression for patients in group C compared with group B that accounted for imbalances of other risk factors showed no different relative risk (RR) for OS (RR 0.77, p = .46).ConclusionOur data do not support a general extension of TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles. The Oncologist 2017;22:570-575 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) maintenance therapy is still the standard of care in patients below the age of 65 years in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. However, in clinical practice, many centers continue TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles. The impact of this continuation is controversial and has not yet been addressed in prospective randomized clinical trials. We compared the effect of more than six cycles of TMZ in comparison with exactly six cycles on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by multivariate analysis and found a benefit in PFS but not OS. Thus, our data do not suggest prolonging TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles, which should be considered in neurooncological practice.