摘要
BACKGROUND It is of vital importance to find radiologic biomarkers that can accurately predict treatment response. Usually, the initiation of antiangiogenic therapy causes a rapid decrease in the contrast enhancing tumor. However, the treatment response is observed only in a fraction of patients due to the partial radiological response secondary to stabilization of abnormal vessels which does not essentially indicate a true antitumor effect. Perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging(PWMRI) techniques have shown implicitness as a strong imaging biomarker for gliomas since they give hemodynamic information of blood vessels. Hence, there is a rapid expansion of PW-MRI related studies and clinical applications.AIM To determine the diagnostic performance of PW-MRI techniques including:(A)dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging(DCE-MRI); and(B)dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging(DSC-MRI) for evaluating response to antiangiogenic therapy in patients with recurrent gliomas.METHODS Databases such as PubMed(MEDLINE included), EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant original articles. The included studies were assessed for methodological quality with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Medical imaging follow-up or histopathological analysis was used as the reference standard. The data were extracted by two reviewers independently, and then the sensitivity, specificity, summary receiver operating characteristic curve, area under the curve(AUC), and heterogeneity were calculated using Meta-Disc 1.4 software.RESULTS This study analyzed a total of six articles. The overall sensitivity for DCE-MRI and DSC-MRI was 0.69 [95% confidence interval(CI): 0.53-0.82], and the specificity was 0.99(95%CI: 0.93-1) by a random effects model(DerSimonianeeLaird model). The likelihood ratio(LR) +, LR-, and diagnostic odds ratio(DOR)were 12.84(4.54-36.28), 0.35(0.22-0.53), and 24.44(7.19-83.06), respectively. The AUC(± SE) was 0.9921(± 0.0120), and the Q* index(± SE) was 0.9640(± 0.0323).For DSC-MRI, the sensitivity was 0.73, the specificity was 0.98, the LR+ was 7.82,the LR-was 0.32, the DOR was 31.65, the AUC(± SE) was 0.9925(± 0.0132), and the Q* index was 0.9649(± 0.0363). For DCE-MRI, the sensitivity was 0.41, the specificity was 0.97, the LR+ was 5.34, the LR-was 0.71, the DOR was 8.76, the AUC(± SE) was 0.9922(± 0.2218), and the Q* index was 0.8935(± 0.3037).CONCLUSION This meta-analysis demonstrated a beneficial value of PW-MRI(DSC-MRI and DCE-MRI) in monitoring the response of recurrent gliomas to antiangiogenic therapy, with reasonable sensitivity, specificity, +LR, and-LR.
BACKGROUND It is of vital importance to find radiologic biomarkers that can accurately predict treatment response. Usually, the initiation of antiangiogenic therapy causes a rapid decrease in the contrast enhancing tumor. However, the treatment response is observed only in a fraction of patients due to the partial radiological response secondary to stabilization of abnormal vessels which does not essentially indicate a true antitumor effect. Perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging(PWMRI) techniques have shown implicitness as a strong imaging biomarker for gliomas since they give hemodynamic information of blood vessels. Hence, there is a rapid expansion of PW-MRI related studies and clinical applications.AIM To determine the diagnostic performance of PW-MRI techniques including:(A)dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging(DCE-MRI); and(B)dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging(DSC-MRI) for evaluating response to antiangiogenic therapy in patients with recurrent gliomas.METHODS Databases such as PubMed(MEDLINE included), EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant original articles. The included studies were assessed for methodological quality with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Medical imaging follow-up or histopathological analysis was used as the reference standard. The data were extracted by two reviewers independently, and then the sensitivity, specificity, summary receiver operating characteristic curve, area under the curve(AUC), and heterogeneity were calculated using Meta-Disc 1.4 software.RESULTS This study analyzed a total of six articles. The overall sensitivity for DCE-MRI and DSC-MRI was 0.69 [95% confidence interval(CI): 0.53-0.82], and the specificity was 0.99(95%CI: 0.93-1) by a random effects model(DerSimonianeeLaird model). The likelihood ratio(LR) +, LR-, and diagnostic odds ratio(DOR)were 12.84(4.54-36.28), 0.35(0.22-0.53), and 24.44(7.19-83.06), respectively. The AUC(± SE) was 0.9921(± 0.0120), and the Q* index(± SE) was 0.9640(± 0.0323).For DSC-MRI, the sensitivity was 0.73, the specificity was 0.98, the LR+ was 7.82,the LR-was 0.32, the DOR was 31.65, the AUC(± SE) was 0.9925(± 0.0132), and the Q* index was 0.9649(± 0.0363). For DCE-MRI, the sensitivity was 0.41, the specificity was 0.97, the LR+ was 5.34, the LR-was 0.71, the DOR was 8.76, the AUC(± SE) was 0.9922(± 0.2218), and the Q* index was 0.8935(± 0.3037).CONCLUSION This meta-analysis demonstrated a beneficial value of PW-MRI(DSC-MRI and DCE-MRI) in monitoring the response of recurrent gliomas to antiangiogenic therapy, with reasonable sensitivity, specificity, +LR, and-LR.
