Regional and Volumetric Parameters for Diffusion-Weighted WHO Grade II and III Glioma Genotyping: A Method Comparison

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Studies consistently report lower ADC values in isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type gliomas than in IDH mutant tumors, but their methods and thresholds vary. This research aimed to compare volumetric and regional ADC measurement techniques for glioma genotyping, with a focus on IDH status prediction. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Treatment-naïve World Health Organization grade II and III gliomas were analyzed by 3 neuroradiologist readers blinded to tissue results. ADC minimum and mean ROIs were defined in tumor and in normal-appearing white matter to calculate normalized values. T2-weighted tumor VOIs were registered to ADC maps with histogram parameters (mean, 2nd and 5th percentiles) extracted. Nonparametric testing (eta 2 and ANOVA) was performed to identify associations between ADC metrics and glioma genotypes. Logistic regression was used to probe the ability of VOI and ROI metrics to predict IDH status. RESULTS:The study included 283 patients with 79 IDH wild-type and 204 IDH mutant gliomas. Across the study population, IDH status was most accurately predicted by ROI mean normalized ADC and VOI mean normalized ADC, with areas under the curve of 0.83 and 0.82, respectively . The results for ROI-based genotyping of nonenhancing and solid-patchy enhancing gliomas were comparable with volumetric parameters (area under the curve ¼ 0.81-0.84). In rim-enhancing, centrally necrotic tumors (n ¼ 23), only volumetric measurements were predictive (0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Regional normalized mean ADC measurements are noninferior to volumetric segmentation for defining solid glioma IDH status. Partially necrotic, rim-enhancing tumors are unsuitable for ROI assessment and may benefit from volumetric ADC quantification.ABBREVIATIONS: AUC ¼ area under the curve; NAWM ¼ normal-appearing white matter; min ¼ minimum; 1p19q codel ¼ codeletion of the short arm of chromosome 1 and the long arm of chromosome 19; rADC ¼ normalized ADC; WHO ¼ World Health Organization

Apparent Diffusion Coefficient in the Differentiation of Common Pediatric Brain Tumors in the Posterior Fossa: Different Region-of-Interest Selection Methods for Time Efficiency, Measurement Reproducibility, and Diagnostic Utility

“…However, it took the most amount of time, and its diagnostic performance was not superior to the other 4 ROI measurements. This result was in line with a recent study by Thust et al, 26 which reported that regional normalized mean ADC measurements were noninferior to volumetric segmentation for isocitrate dehydrogenase status identification of macroscopically solid World Health Organization grades II and III gliomas. Certainly, when this study revealed that there were no significant differences in the diagnostic ability of ADC values by different ROI placements, we tended to have a predilection for the optimal method, ROI-3–5 ovals, which had the advantages of both the shortest time and the best interobserver coherence.…”

How successful is the volumetric ADC value in forecasting isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation status of adult-type diffuse glioma?

“…Technically, regional measurement with ROI in ADC measurement is an effective and successful technique like volumetric measurement. But volumetric ADC quantification is a superior method for partially necrotic or rim-enhancing tumours unsuitable for ROI assessment [6]. In our study, all measurements were made by volumetric technique, thus increasing the accuracy of the results (Fig.…”

ADC for Differentiation between Posttreatment Changes and Recurrence in Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“…In radiology, more consistent and diverse approaches have become available to quantitatively assess biomarkers, with volumetry having become the mainstream of measurement for quantitative imaging research. [31][32][33][34] To seek a more applicable ADC value, one must pursue more studies that use volumetric data.…”