Abstract

IntroductionAim was to develop a full automatic clustering approach of the time-activity curves (TAC) from dynamic 18F-FET PET and evaluate its association with IDH1 mutation status and survival in patients with gliomas.MethodsThirty-seven patients (mean age: 45±13 y) with newly diagnosed gliomas and dynamic 18F-FET PET before any histopathologic investigation or treatment were retrospectively included. Each dynamic 18F-FET PET was realigned to the first image and spatially normalized in the Montreal Neurological Institute template. A tumor mask was semi-automatically generated from Z-score maps. Each brain tumor voxel was clustered in one of the 3 following centroids using dynamic time warping and k-means clustering (centroid #1: slowly increasing slope; centroid #2: rapidly increasing followed by slowly decreasing slope; and centroid #3: rapidly increasing followed by rapidly decreasing slope). The percentage of each dynamic 18F-FET TAC within tumors and other conventional 18F-FET PET parameters (maximum and mean tumor-to-brain ratios [TBRmax and TBRmean], time-to-peak [TTP] and slope) was compared between wild-type and IDH1 mutant tumors. Their prognostic value was assessed in terms of progression free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by Kaplan-Meier estimates.ResultsTwenty patients were IDH1 wild-type and 17 IDH1 mutant. Higher percentage of centroid #1 and centroid #3 within tumors were positively (P = 0.016) and negatively (P = 0.01) correlated with IDH1 mutated status. Also, TBRmax, TBRmean, TTP, and slope discriminated significantly between tumors with and without IDH1 mutation (P range 0.01 to 0.04). Progression occurred in 22 patients (59%) at a median of 13.1 months (7.6–37.6 months) and 13 patients (35%) died from tumor progression. Patients with a percentage of centroid #1 > 90% had a longer survival compared with those with a percentage of centroid #1 < 90% (P = 0.003 for PFS and P = 0.028 for OS). This remained significant after stratification on IDH1 mutation status (P = 0.029 for PFS and P = 0.034 for OS). Compared to other conventional 18F-FET PET parameters, TTP and slope were associated with PFS and OS (P range 0.009 to 0.04).ConclusionsBased on dynamic 18F-FET PET acquisition, we developed a full automatic clustering approach of TAC which appears to be a valuable noninvasive diagnostic and prognostic marker in patients with gliomas.

Highlights

  • Aim was to develop a full automatic clustering approach of the time-activity curves (TAC) from dynamic 18F-FET PET and evaluate its association with IDH1 mutation status and survival in patients with gliomas

  • Based on dynamic 18F-FET PET acquisition, we developed a full automatic clustering approach of TAC which appears to be a valuable noninvasive diagnostic and prognostic marker in patients with gliomas

  • A longer survival is observed in patients with gliomas harboring the presence of IDH1 or IDH2 mutations [5], whereas the absence of IDH1 appears as a strong predictor for poor prognosis [6]

Read more

Summary

Methods

Thirty-seven patients (mean age: 45±13 y) with newly diagnosed gliomas and dynamic 18FFET PET before any histopathologic investigation or treatment were retrospectively included. The percentage of each dynamic 18F-FET TAC within tumors and other conventional 18F-FET PET parameters (maximum and mean tumor-to-brain ratios [TBRmax and TBRmean], time-to-peak [TTP] and slope) was compared between wild-type and IDH1 mutant tumors. Their prognostic value was assessed in terms of progression free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Between August 2009 and December 2015, a total of 52 patients with suspected primary brain tumor on conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were retrospectively enrolled in this study. 15 patients with normal and non-segmentable 18F-FET PET images by our semi-automatic technique were excluded. The local Ethics Research Committee of the State of Vaud took into account the retrospective analysis of our database, approved the protocol (no. 2017–00758) and waived the requirement for patient informed consent for the study analysis

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.