Consensus recommendations for a dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI protocol for use in high-grade gliomas-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Consensus recommendations for a dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI protocol for use in high-grade gliomas

Published:2020-06-09 Issue:9 Volume:22 Page:1262-1275
ISSN:1522-8517
Container-title:Neuro-Oncology
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Boxerman Jerrold L¹²³⁴^ORCID,Quarles Chad C⁵,Hu Leland S⁶⁷³,Erickson Bradley J⁸⁷⁹³,Gerstner Elizabeth R¹⁰¹¹,Smits Marion¹²¹³,Kaufmann Timothy J⁸⁷,Barboriak Daniel P¹⁴²⁹³^ORCID,Huang Raymond H¹⁵¹⁶,Wick Wolfgang¹⁷¹³^ORCID,Weller Michael¹⁸¹³^ORCID,Galanis Evanthia¹⁹⁷,Kalpathy-Cramer Jayashree²⁰,Shankar Lalitha²¹,Jacobs Paula²¹,Chung Caroline²²⁷,van den Bent Martin J²³¹³^ORCID,Chang Susan²⁴,Al Yung W K²⁵,Cloughesy Timothy F²⁶²⁷,Wen Patrick Y¹⁶¹¹,Gilbert Mark R²⁸²⁹,Rosen Bruce R²⁰,Ellingson Benjamin M²⁶³⁰¹¹³¹²,Schmainda Kathleen M³²²,Arons David F,Kingston Ann,Sandak David,Wallace Max,Musella Al,Haynes Chas,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA

2. Representative of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group–American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) Cancer Research Group

3. Representative of the American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR)

4. Representative of the American Society of Functional Neuroradiology (ASFNR)

5. Department of Neuroimaging Research and Barrow Neuroimaging Innovation Center, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

6. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

7. Representative of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology

8. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

9. Representative of the RSNA Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance (QIBA)

10. Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

11. Representative of the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC)

12. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC–University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands

13. Representative of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)

14. Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA

15. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

16. Center for Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

17. Department of Neurooncology, National Center of Tumor Disease, University Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

18. Department of Neurology, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

19. Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

20. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

21. Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Bethesda, Maryland, USA

22. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

23. Department of Neuro-Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands

24. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA

25. Department of Neuro-Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

26. UCLA Neuro-Oncology Program and UCLA Brain Tumor Imaging Laboratory (BTIL), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA

27. Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA

28. Neuro-Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Bethesda, Maryland, USA

29. Representative of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)

30. Departments of Radiological Sciences, Psychiatry, and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA

31. Representative of the Ivy Consortium for Early Phase Clinical Trials

32. Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

Abstract

Abstract Despite the widespread clinical use of dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI, DSC-MRI methodology has not been standardized, hindering its utilization for response assessment in multicenter trials. Recently, the DSC-MRI Standardization Subcommittee of the Jumpstarting Brain Tumor Drug Development Coalition issued an updated consensus DSC-MRI protocol compatible with the standardized brain tumor imaging protocol (BTIP) for high-grade gliomas that is increasingly used in the clinical setting and is the default MRI protocol for the National Clinical Trials Network. After reviewing the basis for controversy over DSC-MRI protocols, this paper provides evidence-based best practices for clinical DSC-MRI as determined by the Committee, including pulse sequence (gradient echo vs spin echo), BTIP-compliant contrast agent dosing (preload and bolus), flip angle (FA), echo time (TE), and post-processing leakage correction. In summary, full-dose preload, full-dose bolus dosing using intermediate (60°) FA and field strength-dependent TE (40–50 ms at 1.5 T, 20–35 ms at 3 T) provides overall best accuracy and precision for cerebral blood volume estimates. When single-dose contrast agent usage is desired, no-preload, full-dose bolus dosing using low FA (30°) and field strength-dependent TE provides excellent performance, with reduced contrast agent usage and elimination of potential systematic errors introduced by variations in preload dose and incubation time.

Funder

National Institutes of Health

Medical College of Wisconsin Cancer Center

American Cancer Society

American Brain Tumor Association

National Brain Tumor Society

National Cancer Institute

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Clinical Neurology,Oncology

Link