Background: Brain tumor therapeutic responses can be quantified from magnetic resonance images (MRI) using 1-(1D) and 2-dimensional (2D) linear and volumetric methods, but few studies in dogs compare these techniques.Hypotheses: Linear methods will be obtained faster, but have less agreement than volumetric measurements. Therapeutic response agreement will be highest with the total T2W tumor volumetric (TTV) method. Therapeutic response at 6-weeks will correlate with overall survival (OS).Animals: Forty-six dogs with intracranial gliomas.Methods: Prospective study. Three raters measured tumors using 1D and 2D linear, TTV, and contrast-enhancing volumetric (CEV) techniques on 143 brain MRI to determine agreement between methods, define therapeutic responses, and assess relations with OS.Results: Raters performed 1D the fastest (2.9 ± 0.57 minutes) and CEV slowest (17.8 ± 6.2 minutes). Inter-and intraobserver agreements were excellent (intraclass correlations ≥.91) across methods. Correlations between linear (1D vs 2D; ρ > .91) and volumetric (TTV vs CEV; ρ > .73) methods were stronger than linear to volumetric comparisons (ρ range, .26-.59). Incorporating clinical and imaging data resulted in fewer discordant therapeutic responses across methods. Dogs having partial tumor responses at 6 weeks had a lower death hazard than dogs with stable or progressive disease when assessed using 2D, CEV, and TTV (hazard ration 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-3.63; P = .008).Conclusions and Clinical Importance: One-dimensional, 2D, CEV, and TTV are comparable for determining therapeutic response. Given the simplicity, universal applicability, and superior performance of the TTV, we recommend its use to standardize glioma therapeutic response criteria.

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) presents a formidable obstacle to the effective delivery of systemically administered pharmacological agents to the brain, with ~5% of candidate drugs capable of effectively penetrating the BBB. A variety of biomaterials and therapeutic delivery devices have recently been developed that facilitate drug delivery to the brain. These technologies have addressed many of the limitations imposed by the BBB by: (1) designing or modifying the physiochemical properties of therapeutic compounds to allow for transport across the BBB; (2) bypassing the BBB by administration of drugs via alternative routes; and (3) transiently disrupting the BBB (BBBD) using biophysical therapies. Here we specifically review colloidal drug carrier delivery systems, intranasal, intrathecal, and direct interstitial drug delivery methods, focused ultrasound BBBD, and pulsed electrical field induced BBBD, as well as the key features of BBB structure and function that are the mechanistic targets of these approaches. Each of these drug delivery technologies are illustrated in the context of their potential clinical applications and limitations in companion animals with naturally occurring intracranial diseases.