Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 7/2017

01-07-2017 | Nuclear Medicine

Radiation injury vs. recurrent brain metastasis: combining textural feature radiomics analysis and standard parameters may increase 18F-FET PET accuracy without dynamic scans

Authors: Philipp Lohmann, Gabriele Stoffels, Garry Ceccon, Marion Rapp, Michael Sabel, Christian P. Filss, Marcel A. Kamp, Carina Stegmayr, Bernd Neumaier, Nadim J. Shah, Karl-Josef Langen, Norbert Galldiks

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

We investigated the potential of textural feature analysis of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET to differentiate radiation injury from brain metastasis recurrence.

Methods

Forty-seven patients with contrast-enhancing brain lesions (n = 54) on MRI after radiotherapy of brain metastases underwent dynamic 18F-FET PET. Tumour-to-brain ratios (TBRs) of 18F-FET uptake and 62 textural parameters were determined on summed images 20-40 min post-injection. Tracer uptake kinetics, i.e., time-to-peak (TTP) and patterns of time-activity curves (TAC) were evaluated on dynamic PET data from 0-50 min post-injection. Diagnostic accuracy of investigated parameters and combinations thereof to discriminate between brain metastasis recurrence and radiation injury was compared.

Results

Diagnostic accuracy increased from 81 % for TBRmean alone to 85 % when combined with the textural parameter Coarseness or Short-zone emphasis. The accuracy of TBRmax alone was 83 % and increased to 85 % after combination with the textural parameters Coarseness, Short-zone emphasis, or Correlation. Analysis of TACs resulted in an accuracy of 70 % for kinetic pattern alone and increased to 83 % when combined with TBRmax.

Conclusions

Textural feature analysis in combination with TBRs may have the potential to increase diagnostic accuracy for discrimination between brain metastasis recurrence and radiation injury, without the need for dynamic 18F-FET PET scans.

Key points

• Textural feature analysis provides quantitative information about tumour heterogeneity
• Textural features help improve discrimination between brain metastasis recurrence and radiation injury
• Textural features might be helpful to further understand tumour heterogeneity
• Analysis does not require a more time consuming dynamic PET acquisition
Literature
1.
Platta CS, Khuntia D, Mehta MP, Suh JH (2010) Current Treatment Strategies for Brain Metastasis and Complications From Therapeutic Techniques. Am J Clin Oncol 33:398–407CrossRefPubMed
2.
Andrews DW, Scott CB, Sperduto PW et al (2004) Whole brain radiation therapy with or without stereotactic radiosurgery boost for patients with one to three brain metastases: Phase III results of the RTOG 9508 randomised trial. Lancet 363:1665–1672CrossRefPubMed
3.
Kondziolka D, Patel A, Lunsford LD et al (1999) Stereotactic radiosurgery plus whole brain radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for patients with multiple brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45:427–434CrossRefPubMed
4.
Kocher M, Soffietti R, Abacioglu U et al (2011) Adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy versus observation after radiosurgery or surgical resection of one to three cerebral metastases: Results of the EORTC 22952-26001 study. J Clin Oncol 29:134–141CrossRefPubMed
5.
Lippitz B, Lindquist C, Paddick I et al (2014) Stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of brain metastases: The current evidence. Cancer Treat Rev 40:48–59CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Greene-Schloesser D, Robbins ME, Peiffer AM et al (2012) Radiation-induced brain injury: A review. Front Oncol 2:1–18CrossRef
8.
Minniti G, Clarke E, Lanzetta G et al (2011) Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases: analysis of outcome and risk of brain radionecrosis. Radiat Oncol 6:48CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Wang Y-XJ, King AD, Zhou H et al (2010) Evolution of radiation-induced brain injury: MR imaging-based study. Radiology 254:210–218CrossRefPubMed
10.
Patel TR, McHugh BJ, Bi WL et al (2011) A comprehensive review of MR imaging changes following radiosurgery to 500 brain metastases. Am J Neuroradiol 32:1885–1892CrossRefPubMed
11.
Kunz M, Thon N, Eigenbrod S et al (2011) Hot spots in dynamic (18)FET-PET delineate malignant tumor parts within suspected WHO grade II gliomas. Neuro Oncol 13:307–316CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Boström J, Hadizadeh DR, Block W et al (2013) Magnetic resonance spectroscopic study of radiogenic changes after radiosurgery of cerebral arteriovenous malformations with implications for the differential diagnosis of radionecrosis. Radiat Oncol 8:54CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Bélohlávek O, Šimonová G, Kantorová I et al (2003) Brain metastases after stereotactic radiosurgery using the Leksell gamma knife: Can FDG PET help to differentiate radionecrosis from tumour progression? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30:96–100CrossRefPubMed
14.
Chao ST, Suh JH, Raja S et al (2001) The sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET in distinguishing recurrent brain tumor from radionecrosis in patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery. Int J Cancer 96:191–197CrossRefPubMed
15.
Galldiks N, Langen K-J, Pope WB (2015) From the clinician’s point of view - What is the status quo of positron emission tomography in patients with brain tumors? Neuro Oncol 17:1434–1444CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Rottenburger C, Hentschel M, Kelly T et al (2011) Comparison of C-11 Methionine and C-11 Choline for PET Imaging of Brain Metastases. Clin Nucl Med 36:639–642CrossRefPubMed
17.
Terakawa Y, Tsuyuguchi N, Iwai Y et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of 11C-methionine PET for differentiation of recurrent brain tumors from radiation necrosis after radiotherapy. J Nucl Med 49:694–699CrossRefPubMed
18.
Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Filss CP et al (2012) Role of O-(2-(18)F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET for differentiation of local recurrent brain metastasis from radiation necrosis. J Nucl Med 53:1367–1374CrossRefPubMed
19.
Lizarraga KJ, Allen-Auerbach M, Czernin J et al (2014) 18F-FDOPA PET for Differentiating Recurrent or Progressive Brain Metastatic Tumors from Late or Delayed Radiation Injury After Radiation Treatment. J Nucl Med 55:30–36CrossRefPubMed
20.
Alkonyi B, Barger GR, Mittal S et al (2012) Accurate Differentiation of Recurrent Gliomas from Radiation Injury by Kinetic Analysis of -11C-Methyl-L-Tryptophan PET. J Nucl Med 53:1058–1064CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Albert NL, Weller M, Suchorska B et al (2016) Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group and European Association for Neuro-Oncology recommendations for the clinical use of PET imaging in gliomas. Neuro Oncol. doi:10.​1093/​neuonc/​now058
22.
Calcagni ML, Galli G, Giordano A et al (2011) Dynamic O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (F-18 FET) PET for Glioma Grading. Clin Nucl Med 36:841–847CrossRefPubMed
23.
Pöpperl G, Kreth FW, Mehrkens JH et al (2007) FET PET for the evaluation of untreated gliomas: correlation of FET uptake and uptake kinetics with tumour grading. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34:1933–1942CrossRefPubMed
24.
Lohmann P, Herzog H, Rota Kops E et al (2015) Dual-time-point O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET for grading of cerebral gliomas. Eur Radiol 25:3017–3024CrossRefPubMed
25.
Jansen NL, Graute V, Armbruster L et al (2012) MRI-suspected low-grade glioma: is there a need to perform dynamic FET PET? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 39:1021–1029CrossRefPubMed
26.
Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V et al (2014) Dynamic 18F-FET PET in Newly Diagnosed Astrocytic Low-Grade Glioma Identifies High-Risk Patients. J Nucl Med 55:198–203CrossRefPubMed
27.
Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V et al (2015) Prognostic significance of dynamic 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed astrocytic high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med 56:9–15CrossRefPubMed
28.
Ceccon G, Lohmann P, Stoffels G et al (2016) Dynamic O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography differentiates brain metastasis recurrence from radiation injury after radiotherapy. Neuro Oncol. doi:10.​1093/​neuonc/​now149
29.
Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Stoffels G et al (2015) Diagnosis of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:685–695CrossRefPubMed
30.
Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Filss C et al (2015) The use of dynamic O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET in the diagnosis of patients with progressive and recurrent glioma. Neuro Oncol 17:1293–1300CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Moulin-Romsée G, D’Hondt E, de Groot T et al (2007) Non-invasive grading of brain tumours using dynamic amino acid PET imaging: does it work for 11C-methionine? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34:2082–2087CrossRefPubMed
32.
Kratochwil C, Combs SE, Leotta K et al (2014) Intra-individual comparison of 18F-FET and 18F-DOPA in PET imaging of recurrent brain tumors. Neuro Oncol 16:434–440CrossRefPubMed
33.
Marusyk A, Polyak K (2011) Tumor heterogeneity: causes and consequences. Biochim Biophys Acta 1805:1–28
34.
35.
Tixier F, Le Rest CC, Hatt M et al (2011) Intratumor heterogeneity characterized by textural features on baseline 18F-FDG PET images predicts response to concomitant radiochemotherapy in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 52:369–378CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Pyka T, Gempt J, Hiob D et al (2016) Textural analysis of pre-therapeutic [18F]-FET-PET and its correlation with tumor grade and patient survival in high-grade gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:133–141CrossRefPubMed
37.
Castellano G, Bonilha L, Li LM, Cendes F (2004) Texture analysis of medical images. Clin Radiol 59:1061–1069CrossRefPubMed
38.
Chowdhury R, Ganeshan B, Irshad S et al (2014) The use of molecular imaging combined with genomic techniques to understand the heterogeneity in cancer metastasis. Br J Radiol 87:1–15CrossRef
39.
Murrell DH, Hamilton AM, Mallett CL et al (2015) Understanding Heterogeneity and Permeability of Brain Metastases in Murine Models of HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Through Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Implications for Detection and Therapy. Transl Oncol 8:176–184CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Lin NU, Lee EQ, Aoyama H et al (2015) Response assessment criteria for brain metastases: Proposal from the RANO group. Lancet Oncol 16:270–278CrossRef
41.
Hamacher K, Coenen HH (2002) Efficient routine production of the 18F-labelled amino acid O-2-18F fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine. Appl Radiat Isot 57:853–856CrossRefPubMed
42.
Langen K-J, Bartenstein P, Boecker H et al (2011) German guidelines for brain tumour imaging by PET and SPECT using labelled amino acids. Nuklearmedizin 50:167–173CrossRefPubMed
43.
Herzog H, Tellmann L, Hocke C et al (2004) NEMA NU2-2001 guided performance evaluation of four Siemens ECAT PET scanners. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 51:2662–2669CrossRef
44.
Pauleit D, Floeth F, Hamacher K et al (2005) O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET combined with MRI improves the diagnostic assessment of cerebral gliomas. Brain 128:678–687CrossRefPubMed
45.
Fang Y-HD, Lin C-Y, Shih M-J et al (2014) Development and evaluation of an open-source software package “CGITA” for quantifying tumor heterogeneity with molecular images. Biomed Res Int 2014:248505PubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural Features for Image Classification. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 3:610–621
47.
Loh H-H, Leu J-G, Luo RC (1988) The analysis of natural textures using run length features. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 35:323–328CrossRef
48.
Amadasun M, King R (1989) Textural features corresponding to textural properties. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 19:1264–1274CrossRef
49.
Thibault G, Fertil B, Navarro C, et al (2009) Texture Indexes and Gray Level Size Zone Matrix Application to Cell Nuclei Classification. Pattern Recognit Inf Process 140–145.
50.
He D-C, Wang L (1991) Texture features based on texture spectrum. Pattern Recognit 24:391–399CrossRef
51.
Horng MH, Sun YN, Lin XZ (2002) Texture feature coding method for classification of liver sonography. Comput Med Imaging Graph 26:33–42CrossRefPubMed
52.
Sun C, Wee WG (1983) Neighboring gray level dependence matrix for texture classification. Comput Vision, Graph Image Process 23:341–352CrossRef
53.
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36CrossRefPubMed
54.
Geertzen J (2012) Inter-Rater Agreement with multiple raters and variables. https:/nlp-ml.io/jg/software/ira/. Accessed 27 Apr 2016
55.
Lowry R (1998) VassarStats: Website for Statistical Computation. http://​vassarstats.​net/​roc_​comp.​html.​ Accessed 29 Sep 2016
56.
Cook GJR, Yip C, Siddique M et al (2012) Are Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET Tumor Textural Features in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Associated with Response and Survival After Chemoradiotherapy? J Nucl Med 54:19–26CrossRefPubMed
57.
Yang F, Thomas MA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW (2013) Temporal analysis of intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity characterized by textural features in cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40:716–727CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
58.
Huang B, Chan T, Kwong DLW et al (2012) Nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Investigation of intratumoral heterogeneity with FDG PET/CT. Am J Roentgenol 199:169–174CrossRef
59.
Salamon J, Derlin T, Bannas P et al (2013) Evaluation of intratumoural heterogeneity on 18F-FDG PET/CT for characterization of peripheral nerve sheath tumours in neurofibromatosis type 1. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40:685–692CrossRefPubMed
60.
Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Ruge MI et al (2013) Role of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET as a diagnostic tool for detection of malignant progression in patients with low-grade glioma. J Nucl Med 54:2046–2054CrossRefPubMed
61.
Bailly C, Bodet-Milin C, Couespel S et al (2016) Revisiting the robustness of PET-based textural features in the context of multi-centric trials. PLoS One 11:1–16
62.
Piroth MD, Liebenstund S, Galldiks N et al (2013) Monitoring of radiochemotherapy in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography: Is dynamic imaging helpful? Mol Imaging 12:1–8
Metadata
Title
Radiation injury vs. recurrent brain metastasis: combining textural feature radiomics analysis and standard parameters may increase 18F-FET PET accuracy without dynamic scans
Authors
Philipp Lohmann
Gabriele Stoffels
Garry Ceccon
Marion Rapp
Michael Sabel
Christian P. Filss
Marcel A. Kamp
Carina Stegmayr
Bernd Neumaier
Nadim J. Shah
Karl-Josef Langen
Norbert Galldiks
Publication date
01-07-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 7/2017
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4638-2

Other articles of this Issue 7/2017

European Radiology 7/2017 Go to the issue

Computed Tomography

Improved image quality in abdominal CT in patients who underwent treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma with small metal implants using a raw data-based metal artifact reduction algorithm

Head and Neck

Treatment Efficacy and Safety of Ethanol Ablation for Thyroglossal Duct Cysts: A Comparison with Surgery

Magnetic Resonance

Prominent cerebral veins on susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) in pulmonary embolism

Paediatric

Subsequent haemorrhage in children with untreated brain arteriovenous malformation: Higher risk with unbalanced inflow and outflow angioarchitecture

Chest

Restrictive allograft syndrome after lung transplantation: new radiological insights

Interventional

Long-term outcome of percutaneous alcohol embolization combined with percutaneous vertebroplasty in aggressive vertebral hemangiomas with epidural extension