动态敏感性对比增强MRI (DSCE-MRI)和质子磁共振波谱(1H-MRS)诊断算法对胶质母细胞瘤与孤立性脑转移和原发性中枢神经系统淋巴瘤的鉴别价值

Q2 Medicine
Le Thi Hong Phuong, Le Thanh Dung, Nguyen Ha Khuong, Nguyen Duy Hung
{"title":"动态敏感性对比增强MRI (DSCE-MRI)和质子磁共振波谱(1H-MRS)诊断算法对胶质母细胞瘤与孤立性脑转移和原发性中枢神经系统淋巴瘤的鉴别价值","authors":"Le Thi Hong Phuong, Le Thanh Dung, Nguyen Ha Khuong, Nguyen Duy Hung","doi":"10.7417/CT.2025.5270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Our study aims to differentiate and develop the diagnostic algorithm for glioblastoma (GBM), solitary brain metastasis (SM), and primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs) using Dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI (DSCE-MRI) and Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 91 patients (51 GBM, 18 SM, and 22 PCNSLs) who underwent preoperative imaging with a standard 3T MRI brain tumor protocol, including conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (cMRI), DSCE-MRI, and 1H-MRS. All patients underwent surgery or stereotactic biopsy with histopathological confirmation. On DSCE-MRI, the ratios of tumor regions (t) and peritumoral regions (e) to normal white matter (n) in CBV and CBF maps were analyzed, including rCBVt, rCBFt, rCBVt/n, rCBFt/n; rCBVe, rCBFe, rCBVe/n, and rCBFe/n. On 1H-MRS, metabolite ratios of the tumor and peritumoral regions were evaluated, comprising tCho/NAA, tCho/Cr, pCho/NAA, and pCho/Cr. Conducted the statistical analysis using the Fisher test or Chi-square test, One-way ANOVA tests, and decision tree analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The differences in indices between the two imaging modalities were statistically significant in differentiating tumor types: (1) GBM vs. SM: the values of rCBVe, rCBVe/n, rCBFt, rCBFe, rCBFt/n, tCho/Cr, tCho/NAA, eCho/Cr, and eCho/NAA were significantly higher in GBM compared to SM (p < 0.05). (2) GBM vs. PCNSLs: the values of rCBVt, rCBVe, rCBVt/n, rCBVe/n, rCBFt, rCBFe, rCBFt/n, rCBFe/n, eCho/Cr, and eCho/NAA were significantly higher in GBM compared to PCNSLs (p < 0.001). (3) SM vs. PCNSLs: The values of rCBVt, rCBVt/n, rCBFt, and rCBFe/n of SM were significantly higher, while tCho/NAA of SM were lower compared to PCNSLs (p < 0.001). The diagnostic algorithm using rCBVe/n, rCBFt/n, rCBVt, rCBVe, and tCho/NAA achieved 100% accuracy in diagnosing GBM and PCNSLs, and 94.7% for SM, with a misclassification risk estimate of 2.1%, the sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 98.9%, and an AUC of 0.993.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The values obtained from DSCE, 1H-MRS, and the diagnostic model play a crucial role in differentiating GBM, SM, and solitary PCNSLs. Our DSCE and 1H-MRS-based algorithm accurately differentiates GBM, SM, and PCNSLs, achieving 100% sensitivity and 98.9% specificity. This non-invasive method enhances pre-treatment diagnosis and prognosis, improving diagnostic quality for patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":50686,"journal":{"name":"Clinica Terapeutica","volume":"176 5","pages":"590-600"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Value of the diagnostic algorithm in differentiating glioblastoma from solitary brain metastasis and primary central nervous system lymphomas using Dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI (DSCE-MRI) and Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).\",\"authors\":\"Le Thi Hong Phuong, Le Thanh Dung, Nguyen Ha Khuong, Nguyen Duy Hung\",\"doi\":\"10.7417/CT.2025.5270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Our study aims to differentiate and develop the diagnostic algorithm for glioblastoma (GBM), solitary brain metastasis (SM), and primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs) using Dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI (DSCE-MRI) and Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 91 patients (51 GBM, 18 SM, and 22 PCNSLs) who underwent preoperative imaging with a standard 3T MRI brain tumor protocol, including conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (cMRI), DSCE-MRI, and 1H-MRS. All patients underwent surgery or stereotactic biopsy with histopathological confirmation. On DSCE-MRI, the ratios of tumor regions (t) and peritumoral regions (e) to normal white matter (n) in CBV and CBF maps were analyzed, including rCBVt, rCBFt, rCBVt/n, rCBFt/n; rCBVe, rCBFe, rCBVe/n, and rCBFe/n. On 1H-MRS, metabolite ratios of the tumor and peritumoral regions were evaluated, comprising tCho/NAA, tCho/Cr, pCho/NAA, and pCho/Cr. Conducted the statistical analysis using the Fisher test or Chi-square test, One-way ANOVA tests, and decision tree analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The differences in indices between the two imaging modalities were statistically significant in differentiating tumor types: (1) GBM vs. SM: the values of rCBVe, rCBVe/n, rCBFt, rCBFe, rCBFt/n, tCho/Cr, tCho/NAA, eCho/Cr, and eCho/NAA were significantly higher in GBM compared to SM (p < 0.05). (2) GBM vs. PCNSLs: the values of rCBVt, rCBVe, rCBVt/n, rCBVe/n, rCBFt, rCBFe, rCBFt/n, rCBFe/n, eCho/Cr, and eCho/NAA were significantly higher in GBM compared to PCNSLs (p < 0.001). (3) SM vs. PCNSLs: The values of rCBVt, rCBVt/n, rCBFt, and rCBFe/n of SM were significantly higher, while tCho/NAA of SM were lower compared to PCNSLs (p < 0.001). The diagnostic algorithm using rCBVe/n, rCBFt/n, rCBVt, rCBVe, and tCho/NAA achieved 100% accuracy in diagnosing GBM and PCNSLs, and 94.7% for SM, with a misclassification risk estimate of 2.1%, the sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 98.9%, and an AUC of 0.993.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The values obtained from DSCE, 1H-MRS, and the diagnostic model play a crucial role in differentiating GBM, SM, and solitary PCNSLs. Our DSCE and 1H-MRS-based algorithm accurately differentiates GBM, SM, and PCNSLs, achieving 100% sensitivity and 98.9% specificity. This non-invasive method enhances pre-treatment diagnosis and prognosis, improving diagnostic quality for patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinica Terapeutica\",\"volume\":\"176 5\",\"pages\":\"590-600\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinica Terapeutica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7417/CT.2025.5270\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinica Terapeutica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7417/CT.2025.5270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在利用动态敏感性对比增强MRI (DSCE-MRI)和质子磁共振波谱(1H-MRS)鉴别和发展胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)、孤立性脑转移(SM)和原发性中枢神经系统淋巴瘤(PCNSLs)的诊断算法。材料和方法:本回顾性研究纳入91例患者(51例GBM, 18例SM, 22例PCNSLs),术前采用标准3T MRI脑肿瘤成像方案,包括常规磁共振成像(cMRI)、DSCE-MRI和1H-MRS。所有患者均行手术或经组织病理学证实的立体定向活检。在DSCE-MRI上,分析CBV和CBF图中肿瘤区域(t)和肿瘤周围区域(e)与正常白质(n)的比值,包括rCBVt、rCBFt、rCBVt/n、rCBFt/n;rCBVe, rCBFe, rCBVe/n和rCBFe/n。在1H-MRS上,评估肿瘤和肿瘤周围区域的代谢物比率,包括tCho/NAA, tCho/Cr, pCho/NAA和pCho/Cr。采用Fisher检验或卡方检验、单因素方差分析和决策树分析进行统计分析。结果:两种影像学指标在鉴别肿瘤类型上的差异有统计学意义:(1)GBM与SM: GBM中rCBVe、rCBVe/n、rCBFt、rCBFe、rCBFt/n、tCho/Cr、tCho/NAA、eCho/Cr、eCho/NAA值显著高于SM (p < 0.05)。(2) GBM与PCNSLs比较:rCBVt、rCBVe、rCBVt/n、rCBVe/n、rCBFt、rCBFe、rCBFt/n、rCBFe/n、eCho/Cr、eCho/NAA值在GBM组显著高于PCNSLs组(p < 0.001)。(3) SM与PCNSLs比较:SM的rCBVt、rCBVt/n、rCBFt、rCBFe/n值显著高于PCNSLs, SM的tCho/NAA值显著低于PCNSLs (p < 0.001)。采用rCBVe/n、rCBFt/n、rCBVt、rCBVe和tCho/NAA的诊断算法对GBM和PCNSLs的诊断准确率为100%,对SM的诊断准确率为94.7%,误分类风险估计为2.1%,敏感性为100%,特异性为98.9%,AUC为0.993。结论:DSCE、1H-MRS及诊断模型对鉴别GBM、SM及孤立性pcnsl具有重要意义。我们基于DSCE和1h - mrs的算法能准确区分GBM、SM和PCNSLs,达到100%的灵敏度和98.9%的特异性。这种无创方法提高了治疗前诊断和预后,提高了患者的诊断质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Value of the diagnostic algorithm in differentiating glioblastoma from solitary brain metastasis and primary central nervous system lymphomas using Dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI (DSCE-MRI) and Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).

Purpose: Our study aims to differentiate and develop the diagnostic algorithm for glioblastoma (GBM), solitary brain metastasis (SM), and primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs) using Dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI (DSCE-MRI) and Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).

Material and methods: This retrospective study included 91 patients (51 GBM, 18 SM, and 22 PCNSLs) who underwent preoperative imaging with a standard 3T MRI brain tumor protocol, including conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (cMRI), DSCE-MRI, and 1H-MRS. All patients underwent surgery or stereotactic biopsy with histopathological confirmation. On DSCE-MRI, the ratios of tumor regions (t) and peritumoral regions (e) to normal white matter (n) in CBV and CBF maps were analyzed, including rCBVt, rCBFt, rCBVt/n, rCBFt/n; rCBVe, rCBFe, rCBVe/n, and rCBFe/n. On 1H-MRS, metabolite ratios of the tumor and peritumoral regions were evaluated, comprising tCho/NAA, tCho/Cr, pCho/NAA, and pCho/Cr. Conducted the statistical analysis using the Fisher test or Chi-square test, One-way ANOVA tests, and decision tree analysis.

Results: The differences in indices between the two imaging modalities were statistically significant in differentiating tumor types: (1) GBM vs. SM: the values of rCBVe, rCBVe/n, rCBFt, rCBFe, rCBFt/n, tCho/Cr, tCho/NAA, eCho/Cr, and eCho/NAA were significantly higher in GBM compared to SM (p < 0.05). (2) GBM vs. PCNSLs: the values of rCBVt, rCBVe, rCBVt/n, rCBVe/n, rCBFt, rCBFe, rCBFt/n, rCBFe/n, eCho/Cr, and eCho/NAA were significantly higher in GBM compared to PCNSLs (p < 0.001). (3) SM vs. PCNSLs: The values of rCBVt, rCBVt/n, rCBFt, and rCBFe/n of SM were significantly higher, while tCho/NAA of SM were lower compared to PCNSLs (p < 0.001). The diagnostic algorithm using rCBVe/n, rCBFt/n, rCBVt, rCBVe, and tCho/NAA achieved 100% accuracy in diagnosing GBM and PCNSLs, and 94.7% for SM, with a misclassification risk estimate of 2.1%, the sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 98.9%, and an AUC of 0.993.

Conclusion: The values obtained from DSCE, 1H-MRS, and the diagnostic model play a crucial role in differentiating GBM, SM, and solitary PCNSLs. Our DSCE and 1H-MRS-based algorithm accurately differentiates GBM, SM, and PCNSLs, achieving 100% sensitivity and 98.9% specificity. This non-invasive method enhances pre-treatment diagnosis and prognosis, improving diagnostic quality for patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinica Terapeutica
Clinica Terapeutica PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
124
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: La Clinica Terapeutica è una rivista di Clinica e Terapia in Medicina e Chirurgia, fondata nel 1951 dal Prof. Mariano Messini (1901-1980), Direttore dell''Istituto di Idrologia Medica dell''Università di Roma “La Sapienza”. La rivista è pubblicata come “periodico bimestrale” dalla Società Editrice Universo, casa editrice fondata nel 1945 dal Comm. Luigi Pellino. La Clinica Terapeutica è indicizzata su MEDLINE, INDEX MEDICUS, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信