We have located links that may give you full text access.
MR Imaging Characteristics and ADC Histogram Metrics for Differentiating Molecular Subgroups of Pediatric Low-Grade Gliomas.
AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2022 August 26
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: BRAF and type 1 neurofibromatosis status are distinctive features in pediatric low-grade gliomas with prognostic and therapeutic implications. We hypothesized that DWI metrics obtained through volumetric ADC histogram analyses of pediatric low-grade gliomas at baseline would enable early detection of BRAF and type 1 neurofibromatosis status.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 40 pediatric patients with histologically proved pilocytic astrocytoma ( n = 33), ganglioglioma ( n = 4), pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma ( n = 2), and diffuse astrocytoma grade 2 ( n = 1). Apart from 1 patient with type 1 neurofibromatosis who had a biopsy, 11 patients with type 1 neurofibromatosis underwent conventional MR imaging to diagnose a low-grade tumor without a biopsy. BRAF molecular analysis was performed for patients without type 1 neurofibromatosis. Eleven patients presented with BRAF V600E-mutant, 20 had BRAF-KIAA rearrangement, and 8 had BRAF wild-type tumors. Imaging studies were reviewed for location, margins, hemorrhage or calcifications, cystic components, and contrast enhancement. Histogram analysis of tumoral diffusivity was performed.
RESULTS: Diffusion histogram metrics (mean, median, and 10th and 90th percentiles) but not kurtosis or skewness were different among pediatric low-grade glioma subgroups ( P < .05). Diffusivity was lowest in BRAF V600E-mutant tumors (the 10th percentile reached an area under the curve of 0.9 on receiver operating characteristic analysis). There were significant differences between evaluated pediatric low-grade glioma margins and cystic components ( P = .03 and P = .001, respectively). Well-defined margins were characteristic of BRAF-KIAA or wild-type BRAF rather than BRAF V600E-mutant or type 1 neurofibromatosis tumors. None of the type 1 neurofibromatosis tumors showed a cystic component.
CONCLUSIONS: Imaging features of pediatric low-grade gliomas, including quantitative diffusion metrics, may assist in predicting BRAF and type 1 neurofibromatosis status, suggesting a radiologic-genetic correlation, and might enable early genetic signature characterization.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 40 pediatric patients with histologically proved pilocytic astrocytoma ( n = 33), ganglioglioma ( n = 4), pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma ( n = 2), and diffuse astrocytoma grade 2 ( n = 1). Apart from 1 patient with type 1 neurofibromatosis who had a biopsy, 11 patients with type 1 neurofibromatosis underwent conventional MR imaging to diagnose a low-grade tumor without a biopsy. BRAF molecular analysis was performed for patients without type 1 neurofibromatosis. Eleven patients presented with BRAF V600E-mutant, 20 had BRAF-KIAA rearrangement, and 8 had BRAF wild-type tumors. Imaging studies were reviewed for location, margins, hemorrhage or calcifications, cystic components, and contrast enhancement. Histogram analysis of tumoral diffusivity was performed.
RESULTS: Diffusion histogram metrics (mean, median, and 10th and 90th percentiles) but not kurtosis or skewness were different among pediatric low-grade glioma subgroups ( P < .05). Diffusivity was lowest in BRAF V600E-mutant tumors (the 10th percentile reached an area under the curve of 0.9 on receiver operating characteristic analysis). There were significant differences between evaluated pediatric low-grade glioma margins and cystic components ( P = .03 and P = .001, respectively). Well-defined margins were characteristic of BRAF-KIAA or wild-type BRAF rather than BRAF V600E-mutant or type 1 neurofibromatosis tumors. None of the type 1 neurofibromatosis tumors showed a cystic component.
CONCLUSIONS: Imaging features of pediatric low-grade gliomas, including quantitative diffusion metrics, may assist in predicting BRAF and type 1 neurofibromatosis status, suggesting a radiologic-genetic correlation, and might enable early genetic signature characterization.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app