Detecting tumor progression in glioma: current standards and new techniques

References

• Stupp R, Hegi ME, Mason WP, et al. Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:459–466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stupp R, Mason WP, Van Den Bent MJ, et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005;352:987–996.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckner JC, Shaw EG, Pugh SL, et al. Radiation plus procarbazine, CCNU, and vincristine in low-grade glioma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016;374:1344–1355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher BJ, Hu C, Macdonald DR, et al. Phase 2 study of temozolomide-based chemoradiation therapy for high-risk low-grade gliomas: preliminary results of radiation therapy oncology group 0424. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2015;91:497–504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cairncross G, Wang M, Shaw E, et al. Phase III trial of chemoradiotherapy for anaplastic oligodendroglioma: Long-term results of RTOG 9402. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013;31:337–343.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuplich M, Hadizadeh DR, Kuchlmeister K, et al. Late and prolonged pseudoprogression in glioblastoma after treatment with Lomustine and Temozolomide. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013;30:129–132.
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Bent MJ, Vogelbaum MA, Wen PY, et al. End point assessment in gliomas: novel treatments limit usefulness of classical Macdonald’s criteria. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009;27:2905–2908.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han K, Ren M, Wick W, et al. Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in glioblastoma: A literature-based meta-analysis from 91 trials. Neuro. Oncol. 2014;16:696–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wen PY, Cloughesy TF, Ellingson BM, et al. Report of the jumpstarting brain tumor drug development coalition and FDA clinical trials neuroimaging endpoint workshop. Neuro. Oncol. 2014;16:vii36– vii 47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert MR, Dignam JJ, Armstrong TS, et al. A randomized trial of bevacizumab for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014;370:699–708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA, et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010;28:1963–1972.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke JL, Chang SM. Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse : challenges in brain tumor imaging. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2009;9:241–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisele SC, Wen PY, Lee EQ. Assessment of brain tumor response: RANO and its offspring. Curr. Treat. Options Oncol. 2016;17:35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Upadhyay N, Waldman AD. Conventional MRI evaluation of gliomas. Br. J. Radiol. 2011;84:107–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC, et al. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J. Clin. Oncol. 1990;8:1277–1280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauman G, Lote K, Larson DA, et al. Pretreatment factors predict overall survival for patients with low-grade glioma: a recursive partitioning analysis. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1999;45:923–929.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellingson BM, Bendszus M, Boxerman JL, et al. Consensus recommendations for a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol in clinical trials. Neuro. Oncol. 2015;17:1188–1198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reardon DA, Ballman KV, Buckner JC, et al. Impact of imaging measurements on response assessment in glioblastoma clinical trials. Neuro. Oncol. 2014;16: vii24–vii35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhauer E, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer. 2009;45:228–247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okada H, Weller M, Huang RY, et al. Immunotherapy response assessment in neuro-oncology: a report of the RANO working group. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:e534–e542.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O’Day S, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin. Cancer Res. 2009;15:7412–7420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazda T, Hardie JG, Pafundi DH, et al. Evaluation of RANO response criteria compared to clinician evaluation in WHO grade III anaplastic astrocytoma: implications for clinical trial reporting and patterns of failure. J. Neurooncology. 2015;8:1699–1712.
   Google Scholar
• Gállego Pérez-Larraya J, Lahutte M, Petrirena G, et al. Response assessment in recurrent glioblastoma treated with irinotecan-bevacizumab: comparative analysis of the Macdonald, RECIST, RANO, and RECIST + F criteria. Neuro. Oncol. 2012;14:667–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen X, Wei X, Zhang Z, et al. Differentiation of true-progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma treated with radiation therapy and concomitant temozolomide by GLCM texture analysis of conventional MRI. Clin. Imaging. 2015;39:775–780.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulik M, Kazda T, Slampa P, et al. The diagnostic ability of follow-up imaging biomarkers after treatment of glioblastoma in the temozolomide era: implications from proton MR spectroscopy and apparent diffusion coefficient mapping. Biomed Res. Int. 2015;2015:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang S, Sakai Y, Chawla S, et al. Differentiating tumor progression from pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastomas using diffusion tensor imaging and dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2016;37:28–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu HH, Choi SH, Ryoo I, et al. Differentiation of true progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma treated with radiation therapy and concomitant temozolomide: comparison study of standard and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging. Radiology. 2013;269:831–840.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellingson BM, Sahebjam S, Kim HJ, et al. Pretreatment ADC histogram analysis is a predictive imaging biomarker for bevacizumab treatment but not chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2014;35:673–679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zulfiqar M, Yousem DM, Lai H. ADC values and prognosis of malignant astrocytomas: does lower ADC predict a worse prognosis independent of grade of tumor? A meta-analysis. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013;200:624–629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryu YJ, Choi SH, Park SJ, et al. Glioma: application of whole-tumor texture analysis of diffusion-weighted imaging for the evaluation of tumor heterogeneity. PLoS One. 2014;9:e108335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brynolfsson P, Nilsson D, Henriksson R, et al. ADC texture-an imaging biomarker for high-grade glioma? Med Phys. 2014;41:101903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law M, Yang S, Wang H, et al. Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2003;24:1989–1998.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulik M, Jancalek R, Vanicek J, et al. Potential of MR spectroscopy for assessment of glioma grading. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2013;115:146–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma N, Cowperthwaite MC, Burnett MG, et al. Differentiating tumor recurrence from treatment necrosis: a review of neuro-oncologic imaging strategies. Neuro. Oncol. 2013;15:515–534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah R, Vattoth S, Jacob R, et al. Radiation necrosis in the brain: imaging features and differentiation from tumor recurrence. Radiographics. 2012;32:1343–1359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guillevin R, Menuel C, Taillibert S, et al. Predicting the outcome of grade II glioma treated with temozolomide using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Br. J. Cancer. 2011;104:1854–1861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lotumolo A, Caivano R, Rabasco P, et al. Comparison between magnetic resonance spectroscopy and diffusion weighted imaging in the evaluation of gliomas response after treatment. Eur. J. Radiol. 2015;84:2597–2604.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Sayyari A, Buckley R, McHenery C, et al. Distinguishing recurrent primary brain tumor from radiation injury: a preliminary study using a susceptibility-weighted MR imaging-guided apparent diffusion coefficient analysis strategy. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2010;31:1049–1054.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratai E, Zhang Z, Snyder BS, et al. MR spectroscopy as an early indicator of response to anti-angiogenic therapy in patients with recurrent glioblastoma : ACRIN 6677 /RTOG 0625. Neuro. Oncol. 2013;15:936–944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weybright P, Sundgren PC, Maly P, et al. Differentiation between brain tumor recurrence and radiation injury using MR spectroscopy. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005;185:1471–1476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elias AE, Carlos RC, Smith EA, et al. MR spectroscopy using normalized and non-normalized metabolite ratios for differentiating recurrent brain tumor from radiation injury. Acad. Radiol. 2011;18:1101–1108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain R, Ellika SK, Scarpace L, et al. Quantitative estimation of permeability surface-area product in astroglial brain tumors using perfusion CT and correlation with histopathologic grade. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2008;29:694–700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain R, Narang J, Schultz LR, et al. Permeability estimates in histopathology-proved treatment-induced necrosis using perfusion CT: can these add to other perfusion parameters in differentiating from recurrent/progressive tumors?. Am J. Neuroradiol. 2011;32:658–663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Essig M, Shiroishi MS, Nguyen TB, et al. Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked technical questions. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2013;200:24–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 1999;10:223–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson A, Jayson GC, Li KL, et al. Reproducibility of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in newly presenting glioma. Br. J. Radiol. 2003;76:153–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suh CH, Kim HS, Choi YJ, et al. Prediction of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastomas using the initial and final area under the curves ratio derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted perfusion MR imaging. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2013;34:2278–2286.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostergaard L. Principles of cerebral perfusion imaging by bolus tracking. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2005;22:710–717.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cha S, Knopp EA, Johnson G, et al. Intracranial mass lesions: dynamic contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted echo-planar perfusion MR imaging. Radiology. 2002;223:11–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santarosa C, Castellano A, Conte GM, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging for glioma grading: preliminary comparison of vessel compartment and permeability parameters using hotspot and histogram analysis. Eur. J. Radiol. 2016;85:1147–1156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young RJ, Gupta A, Shah AD, et al. MRI perfusion in determining pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma. Clin. Imaging. 2013;37:41–49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gahramanov S, Muldoon LL, Varallyay CG, et al. Pseudoprogression of glioblastoma after chemo- and radiation therapy: diagnosis by using dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with ferumoxytol versus gadoteridol and correlation with survival. Radiology. 2013;266:842–852.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedekar D, Jensen T, Schmainda KM. Standardization of Relative Cerebral Blood Volume (rCBV) image maps for ease of both inter- and intrapatient comparisons. Magn. Reson. Med. 2010;64:907–913.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmainda KM, Prah M, Connelly J, et al. Dynamic-susceptibility contrast agent MRI measures of relative cerebral blood volume predict response to bevacizumab in recurrent high-grade glioma. Neuro. Oncol. 2014;16:880–888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haacke EM, Xu Y, Cheng Y-CN, et al. Susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI). Magn. Reson. Med. 2004;52:612–618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fahrendorf D, Schwindt W, Wolfer J, et al. Benefits of contrast-enhanced SWI in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. Eur. Radiol. 2013;23:2868–2879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupo JM, Molinaro AM, Essock-burns E, et al. The effects of anti-angiogenic therapy on the formation of radiation-induced microbleeds in normal brain tissue of patients with glioma. Neuro. Oncol. 2016;18:87–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammed W, Xunning H, Haibin S, et al. Clinical applications of susceptibility-weighted imaging in detecting and grading intracranial gliomas: A review. Cancer Imaging. 2013;13:186–195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haneder S, Giordano FA, Konstandin S, et al. 23Na-MRI of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme after intraoperative radiotherapy: technical note. Neuroradiology. 2015;57:321–326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laymon CM, Oborski MJ, Lee VK, et al. Combined imaging biomarkers for therapy evaluation in glioblastoma multiforme: correlating sodium MRI and F-18 FLT PET on a voxel-wise basis. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2012;30:1268–1278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schepkin VD, Bejarano FC, Morgan T, et al. In vivo magnetic resonance imaging of sodium and diffusion in rat glioma at 21.1 Tesla. Magn. Reson. Med. 2012;67:1159–1166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park S-H, Larson PEZ, Zierhut ML, et al. Hyperpolarized 13C magnetic resonance metabolic imaging: application to brain tumors. Neuro. Oncol. 2010;12:133–144.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miloushev VZ, Keshari KR, Holodny AI. Hyperpolarization MRI: preclinical models and potential applications in neuroradiology. Top. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2016;25:31–37.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gallagher FA, Kettunen MI, Day SE, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of pH in vivo using hyperpolarized 13C-labelled bicarbonate. Nature. 2008;453:940–943.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma B, Blakeley JO, Hong X, et al. Applying amide proton transfer-weighted MRI to distinguish pseudoprogression from true progression in malignant gliomas. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2016;44:456–462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris RJ, Cloughesy TF, Liau LM, et al. PH-weighted molecular imaging of gliomas using amine chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI. Neuro. Oncol. 2015;17:1514–1524.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togao O, Hiwatashi A, Keupp J, et al. Scan-rescan reproducibility of parallel transmission based amide proton transfer imaging of brain tumors. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2015;42:1346–1353.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Togao O, Yoshiura T, Keupp J, et al. Amide proton transfer imaging of adult diffuse gliomas: correlation with histopathological grades. Neuro. Oncol. 2014;16:441–448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heo H-Y, Zhang Y, Lee D-H, et al. Accelerating chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) MRI by combining compressed sensing and sensitivity encoding techniques. Magn. Reson. Med. 2016. [E-pub ahead of print].
   Google Scholar
• Tie J, Gunawardana DH, Rosenthal MA. Differentiation of tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis in high-grade gliomas using 201Tl-SPECT. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2008;15:1327–1334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexiou GA, Zikou A, Tsiouris S, et al. Comparison of diffusion tensor, dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI and 99mTc-Tetrofosmin brain SPECT for the detection of recurrent high-grade glioma. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2014;32:854–859.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin A, Moustafa H, Ahmed E, et al. Glioma residual or recurrence versus radiation necrosis: accuracy of pentavalent technetium-99m-dimercaptosuccinic acid [Tc-99m (V) DMSA] brain SPECT compared to proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS): initial results. J. Neurooncol. 2012;106:579–587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caroline I, Rosenthal MA. Imaging modalities in high-grade gliomas: pseudoprogression, recurrence, or necrosis? J Clin. Neurosci. 2012;19:633–637.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung J-K, Kim YK, Kim S, et al. Usefulness of 11C-methionine PET in the evaluation of brain lesions that are hypo- or isometabolic on 18F-FDG PET. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging. 2002;29:176–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terakawa Y, Tsuyuguchi N, Iwai Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 11C-methionine PET for differentiation of recurrent brain tumors from radiation necrosis after radiotherapy. J. Nucl. Med. 2008;49:694–699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim YH, Oh SW, Lim YJ, et al. Differentiating radiation necrosis from tumor recurrence in high-grade gliomas: assessing the efficacy of 18F-FDG PET, 11C- methionine PET and perfusion MRI. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2010;112:758–765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Stoffels G, et al. Diagnosis of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging. 2015;42:685–695.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morana G, Piccardo A, Puntoni M, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of 18 F-DOPA PET and 1 H-MR spectroscopy in pediatric supratentorial infiltrative gliomas: a comparative study. Neuro. Oncol. 2015;17:1637–1647.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen W, Silverman DHS, Delaloye S, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with 18F-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. J. Nucl. Med. 2006;47:904–911.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarzenberg J, Czernin J, Cloughesy TF, et al. Treatment response evaluation using 18 F-FDOPA PET in patients with recurrent malignant glioma on bevacizumab therapy. Clin. Cancer Res. 2014;20:3550–3559.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venneti S, Dunphy MP, Zhang H, et al. Glutamine-based PET imaging facilitates enhanced metabolic evaluation of gliomas in vivo. Sci. Transl. Med. 2015;7:1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karavaeva E, Harris RJ, Leu K, et al. Relationship between [18F]FDOPA PET uptake, Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC), and proliferation rate in recurrent malignant gliomas. Mol. Imaging Biol. 2015;17:434–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belohlavek O, Fencl P, Majovsky M, et al. FLT-PET in previously untreated patients with low-grade glioma can predict their overall survival. Nucl. Med. Rev. Cent. East. Eur. 2014;17:7–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dunet V, Pomoni A, Hottinger A, et al. Performance of 18F-FET versus 18F-FDG-PET for the diagnosis and grading of brain tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro. Oncol. 2016;18:426–434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy B, Gupta RK, Maudsley AA, et al. Utility of multiparametric 3-T MRI for glioma characterization. Neuroradiology. 2013;55:603–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cha J, Kim ST, Kim HJ, et al. Differentiation of tumor progression from pseudoprogression in patients with posttreatment glioblastoma using multiparametic histogram analysis. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2014;37:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Yeung TPC, Yartsev S, Lee T-Y, et al. Relationship of computed tomography perfusion and positron emission tomography to tumour progression in malignant glioma. J. Med. Radiat. Sci. 2014;61:4–13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jena A, Taneja S, Gambhir A, et al. Glioma recurrence versus radiation necrosis: single-session multiparametric approach using simultaneous O-(2-18F-Fluoroethyl)-L- Tyrosine PET/MRI. Clin. Nucl. Med. 2016;41:228–236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim MM, Lawrence TS, Cao Y. Advances in magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography imaging: assessing response in the treatment of low-grade glioma. Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 2015;25:172–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung C, Metser U, Ménard C. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography imaging for grading and molecular characterization of glioma. Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 2015;25:164–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villalva C, Cortes U, Wager M, et al. O6-methylguanine-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status in glioma stem-like cells is correlated to temozolomide sensitivity under differentiation-promoting conditions. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2012;13:6983–6994.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandes AA, Franceschi E, Tosoni A, et al. MGMT promoter methylation status can predict the incidence and outcome of pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. J. Clin. Oncol. 2008;26:2192–2197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moon W-J, Choi JW, Roh HG, et al. Imaging parameters of high grade gliomas in relation to the MGMT promoter methylation status: the CT, diffusion tensor imaging, and perfusion MR imaging. Neuroradiology. 2012;54:555–563.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okita Y, Nonaka M, Shofuda T, et al. 11C-methinine uptake correlates with MGMT promoter methylation in nonenhancing gliomas. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2014;125:212–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang HC, Kim CY, Han JH, et al. Pseudoprogression in patients with malignant gliomas treated with concurrent temozolomide and radiotherapy: potential role of p53. J. Neurooncol. 2011;102:157–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pouleau HB, Sadeghi N, Balériaux D, et al. High levels of cellular proliferation predict pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. Int. J. Oncol. 2012;40:923–928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Velthuysen MLF, Groen EJ, Sanders J, et al. Reliability of proliferation assessment by Ki-67 expression in neuroendocrine neoplasms: eyeballing or image analysis? Neuroendocrinology. 2014;100:288–292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gzell C, Wheeler H, Huang D, et al. Proliferation index predicts survival after second craniotomy within 6 months of adjuvant radiotherapy for high-grade glioma. Clin. Oncol. 2016;28:215–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eckel-Passow JE, Lachance DH, Molinaro AM, et al. Glioma groups based on 1p/19q, IDH, and TERT promoter mutations in tumors. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015;372:2499–2508.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de la Fuente MI, Young RJ, Rubel J, et al. Integration of 2-hydroxyglutarate-proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy into clinical practice for disease monitoring in isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant glioma. Neuro. Oncol. 2016; 18:283–290.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andronesi OC, Rapalino O, Gerstner E, et al. Detection of oncogenic IDH1 mutations using magnetic resonance spectroscopy of 2-hydroxyglutarate. J. Clin. Invest. 2013;123:3659–3663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bal D, Gryff‐Keller A. 1H and 13C NMR study of 2‐hydroxyglutaric acid and its lactone. Magn. Reson. Chem. 2002;40:533–536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiao XJ, Ellingson BM, Kim HJ, et al. Arterial spin-labeling perfusion mri stratifies progression-free survival and correlates with epidermal growth factor receptor status in glioblastoma. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2015;36:672–677.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, et al. The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol. 2016;131:803–820.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ElBanan MG, Amer AM, Zinn PO, et al. Imaging genomics of glioblastoma: state of the art bridge between genomics and neuroradiology Neuroimaging. Clin. N. Am. 2015;25:141–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellingson BM, Kim E, Woodworth DC, et al. Diffusion MRI quality control and functional diffusion map results in ACRIN 6677/RTOG 0625: A multicenter, randomized, phase II trial of bevacizumab and chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma. Int. J. Oncol. 2015;46:1883–1892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar