Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Tumor-related Perfusion Changes in White Matter Adjacent to Brain Tumors: Pharmacodynamic Analysis of Dynamic 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging

RADEK TUPÝ, HYNEK MÍRKA, JAN MRAČEK, VLADIMÍR PŘIBÁŇ, ONDŘEJ HES, SAMUEL VOKURKA and JIŘÍ FERDA
Anticancer Research July 2018, 38 (7) 4149-4152; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.12707
RADEK TUPÝ
1Department of Medical Imaging, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for RADEK TUPÝ
  • For correspondence: tupyr@fnplzen.cz
HYNEK MÍRKA
1Department of Medical Imaging, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JAN MRAČEK
2Department of Neurosurgery, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
VLADIMÍR PŘIBÁŇ
2Department of Neurosurgery, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ONDŘEJ HES
3Sikls Pathology Department, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SAMUEL VOKURKA
4Department of Oncology and Radiotherapeutics, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JIŘÍ FERDA
1Department of Medical Imaging, Charles University Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: To verify perfusion differences in white matter adjacent to glioblastomas and metastatic tumors in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) 3T-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using gradient echo (GRE) T1 techniques. Materials and Methods: A retrospective comparative study was carried out on adults with glioblastoma (n=67) and brain metastases (n=31). In each patient, conventional 3T-MRI and DCE-MRI with 25 acquisitions of GRE-T1 were performed. The initial area under the contrast-uptake curve (iAUC) and transfer constant (Ktrans) in peritumoral regions of the white matter were evaluated using T1 pharmacodynamic modeling software. Results: Statistically significantly higher relative iAUC (p<0.001) and Ktrans (p<0.01) values were recorded for peritumoral white matter near glioblastomas compared to that near metastases: 2.29 (SD=1.11) and 2.12 (SD=1.05) vs. 0.96 (SD=0.31) and 1.18 (SD=0.35), respectively. Conclusion: In comparison to Ktrans, the iAUC obtained by DCE-MRI is more suitable for assessing glioblastomas because it better reflects pharmacokinetic peritumoral changes. Increased iAUC in white matter near to tumor generally indicates glioblastoma, however, a low level does not exclude it.

  • Glioblastoma
  • brain metastases
  • dynamic contrast-enhanced
  • perfusion
  • white matter infiltration
  • magnetic resonance

Brain metastases are the most common brain tumors detected in adults. An increase of their incidence has been reported, probably as a consequence of improvement of treatment for primary tumors and detection and diagnosis of brain metastases (1). Lung, breast, colorectal and renal cancer, and malignant melanoma are the most typical sources of brain metastases (2, 3). The most frequent primary brain tumor is glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), the most malignant subtype of neuroepithelial tumor according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors (4), with a reported incidence of 3.2/100,000 per year in adults and 5-year overall survival up to 5% (5,6). Early diagnosis and differentiation of GBM and brain metastases contributes to early and very important decision-making processes for further diagnostic and therapeutic options, mostly comprising surgery resection and radiation therapy, and leads to more effective healthcare.

The aim of the study was to verify perfusion differences in white matter adjacent to glioblastomas and metastatic tumors in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using gradient echo (GRE) T1 techniques.

Materials and Methods

Patients. A retrospective comparable single-center study was carried out of 98 adults (40 men, 58 women) with median age of 65 (35-84) years and with histopathologically confirmed glioblastomas (n=67) or brain metastases (n=31) of lung cancer (n=12), melanoma (n=9), breast cancer (n=5), colorectal cancer (n=2), renal cancer (n=2) or leiomyosarcoma (n=1). Prior to surgical intervention, each patient underwent MRI of the brain at our center within 2012-2017. Patients without clear contrast-enhanced lesions and with acute hemorrhage in the lesion were not included in the study.

Equipment and data acquisition. All examinations were performed on 3T-MRI system (Skyra, Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) by using 20-channel phased-array head coil. Routine examination protocol included transverse fast spin echo T2-weighted imaging (T2 TSE), transverse fluid attenuated inversion recovery T2-weighted imaging (T2 TIRM), transverse and sagittal spin echo T1 weighted imaging (T1 SE), transverse diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). Dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) was performed after intravenous administration of the contrast agent gadoterate meglumine (Dotarem; Guerbet, Roissy, France) at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg (=0.2 ml/kg) and flow rate of 2 ml/s. DCE comprised continuous 25 acquisitions of gradient echo (GRE) T1-weighted volumetric-interpolated breath-hold examination imaging (T1 VIBE) with these parameters: TR/TE 5.1/1.9 ms, field of view 199×220 mm, matrix 232×256, in-plane resolution 0.86×0.86 mm, slice thickness 3 mm, time resolution 6.3 s. The DCE was followed by transverse gradient echo 3D T1-weighted imaging (T1 MP-RAGE).

Data processing and statistics. Quantitative perfusion analysis was performed using Tissue 4D syngo (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) software. Values of the vascularization parameter initial area under the contrast-uptake curve (iAUC) and the permeability parameter transfer constant (Ktrans) were measured in a circle-shaped region of interest (ROI) with 10 mm radius, localized in peritumoral white matter and with a distance of 5 mm between the border of the ROI and the border of the contrast-enhanced lesion (see Figure 1). ROIs were selected not to include the gray matter and not to include any visible blood vessels. The measured values for ROIs were divided (normalized) by the values measured on the same image slice in the area of contralateral non-affected healthy white matter ROI (see Figure 1) and thus the relative (normalized) iAUC and Ktrans values were obtained and then statistically analyzed. Normal non-affected healthy appearance of contralateral white matter was verified by means of all the MRI protocol sequences. Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad InStat (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA) with unpaired t-test and values p<0.05 were considered as indicating statistically significant differences.

Results

Absolute iAUC and Ktrans values were generally increased in the peritumoral area of GBM. In metastases, the absolute iAUC and Ktrans values were slightly lower or were similar to those measured in the contralateral unaffected healthy white matter (see Figures 1 and 2 for more details). Mean relative iAUC and Ktrans values were statistically significantly higher for peritumoral white matter near GBM compared with metastases: 2.29 (SD=1.11) and 2.12 (SD=1.05) vs. 0.96 (SD=0.31) and 1.18 (SD=0.35), p<0.001 and p<0.01, respectively.

A threshold of 1.2 or more for relative iAUC and Ktrans was arbitrarily assigned to define GBM, and indicated 20% higher values of these parameters compared to those for healthy white matter. Using relative iUAC and Ktrans values in detecting glioblastomas, there were 52/67 and 53/67 true-positive cases, sensitivity of 77.6% and 79.1%, specificity of 83.9% and 48.4%, positive predictive value of 91.2% and 76.8%, and negative predictive values of 63.4% and 51.7%, respectively.

Discussion

Brain metastases usually have very well-defined and clearly circumscribed margins, regardless of the large heterogeneity of their primary solid tumors. The maximum depth of brain tissue infiltration with malignant metastatic cells is observed in small-cell lung cancer and melanoma, however, the distances do not exceed approximately 1 mm from the anatomically defined margins of metastases (7, 8). Usually, there is also vasogenic edema present in the area surrounding metastases and this leads to restriction of blood perfusion according to the level of edema (9). For GBM on the other hand, very aggressive infiltrative growth is typical (10). Malignant cells invade mostly individually or in small groups alongside tracks of myelinated fibers in white matter, in perivascular, perineuronal and subpial spaces, and these malignant cells can histopathologically be found even several centimeters from the anatomically defined tumor (11, 12). Very often in GBM, there is also high expression of vascular endothelial growth factor, which is the main cause of vasodilatation, neovascularization and high microvascular permeability of tumor (13, 14). The extent of neovascularization determines the biological aggressiveness of the tumor.

In brain tumors, conventional non-dynamic MRI with administration of contrast agent uses the effect of blood–brain barrier disruption, and that is why contrast enhancement is not present in the whole tumor mass, but only in areas with preserved vascular circulation together with those with blood–brain barrier disruption. In GBM, this phenomenon is usually in the form of an irregular ring-like rim around central necrosis. Diffuse infiltration with tumor cells near the rim, not yet causing blood–brain barrier disruption and contrast leakage into the cerebral interstitial tissue, combined with vasogenic edema, is not visible in conventional MRI. However, the presence of tumor cell infiltration in this phase leads to vascular changes that are apparent as increased vessel caliber and neovascularization, with increased perfusion in surrounding areas (15, 16). The changes of perfusion parameters in areas surrounding GBM, and thus the indirect detection of its infiltrative growth, can be distinguished by dynamic post-contrast imaging. Results of our analysis correlate well with GBM-related circulatory and vascularization characteristics and parameters. The white matter peritumoral changes were better represented by iAUC values, which reflect the inflow of contrast agent into the region of interest within 60 seconds of its i.v. administration, and represent vascular perfusion. In contrast, Ktrans is a calculated parameter obtained from a two-compartment exchange model, and reflects the combined characteristics of blood flow, vascular space volume and permeability (blood–brain barrier disruption) (17, 18). Increased blood perfusion in the area of GBM has also been described in several smaller groups of patients who were examined by dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced (DSC) MRI (19, 20). Mathematic models used in DSC methods presume full integrity of the blood–brain barrier, and cannot be used to investigate capillary leakage, which is why permeability (blood–brain barrier disruption) is not taken into consideration in this situation. In comparison, DCE MRI has an advantage in its capability to quantify microvascular permeability and characterize the tumor tissue. Quantitative measurement of microvascular permeability in human brain tumors achieved using DCE MRI correlates with histological grade (21) and helps find the most suitable location for targeted biopsy.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Imaging of glioblastoma (upper panel) and breast cancer metastasis (lower panel). T1 Volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) image with contrast-enhanced ring lesions (left hand images), T1 VIBE fusion with maps of initial area under the contrast-uptake curve with region of interest located in peritumoral (middle images) and contralateral healthy white matter area (right hand images).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Distribution of relative values of initial area under the contrast-uptake curve and transfer constant measured in the peritumoral area of brain metastases (MT) and glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).

In the case of treated brain tumors, DCE MRI differentiates pseudoprogression from recurrent GBM (22). DCE MRI allows better quantification of perfusion parameters using less volume of contrast agent (17, 23).

In order to minimize the influence of artefacts and to standardize measurement methods in our study, a rather large ROI was used to assess perfusion parameters. In some cases, it was rather difficult to find a standardized ROI fulfilling all the demands defined by the study protocol (i.e. diameter, distance, white matter not containing grey matter nor vessels). The low negative predictive value of the test was probably influenced by highly heterogeneous GBM growth, whereby various parts of the tumor may present various and different biological characteristics ranging between infiltrative and non-infiltrative tumor growth (12) and with variable changes in circulatory and vascularization. We can postulate that in daily practice, the finding of even a small peritumor area with a high iAUC value may lead to significant suspicion of GM.

Conclusion

Different perfusion characteristics in peritumoral matter in glioblastomas and brain metastases are detectable with post-contrast perfusion T1 MRI. The iAUC obtained by DCE-MRI is more suitable to assess glioblastoma because it better reflects its neovascularisation compared to Ktrans and can help better distinguish glioblastoma and metastases. Increased iAUC values measured in the area near by contrast enhanced tumor mostly indicate glioblastoma, however, low iAUC value does not exclude it. DCE-MRI and its analysis should always be a part of pre-surgical focal brain lesions examination protocol.

Acknowledgements

Supported by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic for conceptual development of research organization 00669806 – Faculty Hospital in Pilsen, Czech Republic and Charles University Research Fund (project P36).

  • Received April 18, 2018.
  • Revision received May 14, 2018.
  • Accepted May 16, 2018.
  • Copyright© 2018, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Nayak L,
    2. Lee EQ,
    3. Wen PY
    : Epidemiology of brain metastases. Curr Oncol Rep 14(1): 48-54, 2012.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Soffietti R,
    2. Cornu P,
    3. Delattre JY,
    4. Grant R,
    5. Graus F,
    6. Grisold W,
    7. Heimans J,
    8. Hildebrand J,
    9. Hoskin P,
    10. Kalljo M,
    11. Krauseneck P,
    12. Marosi C,
    13. Siegal T,
    14. Vecht C
    : EFNS Guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of brain metastases: report of an EFNS Task Force. Eur J Neurol 13(7): 674-681, 2006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Gavrilovic IT,
    2. Posner JB
    : Brain metastases: epidemiology and pathophysiology. J Neurooncol 75(1): 5-14, 2005.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Louis DN,
    2. Ohgaki H,
    3. Wiestler OD,
    4. Cavenee WK,
    5. Burger PC,
    6. Jouvet A,
    7. Scheithauer BW,
    8. Kleihues P
    : The 2007 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System. Acta Neuropathol 114(2): 97-109, 2007.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Thakkar JP,
    2. Dolecek TA,
    3. Horbinski C,
    4. Ostrom QT,
    5. Lightner DD,
    6. Barnholtz-Sloan JS,
    7. Villano JL
    : Epidemiologic and molecular prognostic review of glioblastoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 23(10): 1985-1996, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Schwartzbaum JA,
    2. Fisher JL,
    3. Aldape KD,
    4. Wrensch M
    : Epidemiology and molecular pathology of glioma. Nat Clin Pract Neurol 2(9): 494-503, 2006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Baumert BG,
    2. Rutten I,
    3. Dehing-Oberije C,
    4. Twijnstra A,
    5. Dirx MJ,
    6. Debougnoux-Huppertz RM,
    7. Lambin P,
    8. Kubat B
    : A pathology-based substrate for target definition in radiosurgery of brain metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66(1): 187-194, 2006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Raore B,
    2. Schniederjan M,
    3. Prabhu R,
    4. Brat DJ,
    5. Shu HK,
    6. Olson JJ
    : Metastasis infiltration: an investigation of the postoperative brain-tumor interface. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 15;81(4): 1075-1080, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Sugo N,
    2. Harada N,
    3. Yokota K,
    4. Miyazaki Ch,
    5. Ohtsuka T,
    6. Ohishi H,
    7. Seiki Y,
    8. Tachiki K
    : Determination of peritumoral hypoperfusion volumes surrounding brain tumors using three-dimensional SPECT. CI Kenkyu 25(2): 77-85, 2003.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Giese A,
    2. Westphal M
    : Glioma invasion in the central nervous system. Neurosurgery 39(2): 235-250, 1996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Claes A,
    2. Idema AJ,
    3. Wesseling P
    : Diffuse glioma growth: a guerilla war. Acta Neuropathol 114(5): 443-458, 2007.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Rees JH,
    2. Smirniotopoulos JG,
    3. Jones RV,
    4. Wong K
    : Glioblastoma multiforme: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 16(6): 1413-1438, 1996.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Johansson M,
    2. Brännström T,
    3. Bergenheim AT,
    4. Henriksson R
    : Spatial expression of VEGF-A in human glioma. J Neurooncol 59(1): 1-6, 2002.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Plate KH,
    2. Risau W
    : Angiogenesis in malignant gliomas. Glia 15(3): 339-347, 1995.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Hardee ME,
    2. Zagzag D
    : Mechanisms of glioma-associated neovascularization. Am J Pathol 181(4): 1126-1141, 2012.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Nowacki P,
    2. Kojder I
    : Peritumoral angiogenesis around primary and metastatic brain neoplasms. Morphometric analysis. Folia Neuropathol 39(2): 95-102, 2001.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Cuenod CA,
    2. Balvay D
    : Perfusion and vascular permeability: basic concepts and measurement in DCE-CT and DCE-MRI. Diagn Interv Imaging 94(12): 1187-1204, 2013.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Sourbron S,
    2. Ingrisch M,
    3. Siefert A,
    4. Reiser M,
    5. Herrmann K
    : Quantification of cerebral blood flow, cerebral blood volume, and blood-brain-barrier leakage with DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Med 62(1): 205-217, 2009.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Wang S,
    2. Kim S,
    3. Chawla S,
    4. Wolf RL,
    5. Knipp DE,
    6. Vossough A,
    7. O'Rourke DM,
    8. Judy KD,
    9. Poptani H,
    10. Melhem ER
    : Differentiation between glioblastomas, solitary brain metastases, and primary cerebral lymphomas using diffusion tensor and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol 32(3): 507-514, 2011.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    1. Ma JH,
    2. Kim HS,
    3. Rim NJ,
    4. Kim SH,
    5. Cho KG
    : Differentiation among glioblastoma multiforme, solitary metastatic tumor, and lymphoma using whole-tumor histogram analysis of the normalized cerebral blood volume in enhancing and perienhancing lesions. Am J Neuroradiol 31(9): 1699-1706, 2010.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Roberts HC,
    2. Roberts TP,
    3. Brasch RC,
    4. Dillon WP
    : Quantitative measurement of microvascular permeability in human brain tumors achieved using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: correlation with histologic grade. Am J Neuroradiol 21(5): 891-899, 2000.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Thomas AA,
    2. Arevalo-Perez J,
    3. Kaley T,
    4. Lyo J,
    5. Peck KK,
    6. Shi W,
    7. Zhang Z,
    8. Young RJ
    : Dynamic contrast enhanced T1 MRI perfusion differentiates pseudoprogression from recurrent glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 125(1): 183-190, 2015.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Kao HW,
    2. Chiang SW,
    3. Chung HW,
    4. Tsai FY,
    5. Chen CY
    : Advanced MR imaging of gliomas: an update. Biomed Res Int 2013: 970586, 2013.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 38 (7)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 38, Issue 7
July 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Tumor-related Perfusion Changes in White Matter Adjacent to Brain Tumors: Pharmacodynamic Analysis of Dynamic 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
4 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Tumor-related Perfusion Changes in White Matter Adjacent to Brain Tumors: Pharmacodynamic Analysis of Dynamic 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging
RADEK TUPÝ, HYNEK MÍRKA, JAN MRAČEK, VLADIMÍR PŘIBÁŇ, ONDŘEJ HES, SAMUEL VOKURKA, JIŘÍ FERDA
Anticancer Research Jul 2018, 38 (7) 4149-4152; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12707

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Tumor-related Perfusion Changes in White Matter Adjacent to Brain Tumors: Pharmacodynamic Analysis of Dynamic 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging
RADEK TUPÝ, HYNEK MÍRKA, JAN MRAČEK, VLADIMÍR PŘIBÁŇ, ONDŘEJ HES, SAMUEL VOKURKA, JIŘÍ FERDA
Anticancer Research Jul 2018, 38 (7) 4149-4152; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12707
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The Systemic Inflammation Score Is an Independent Prognostic Factor for Esophageal Cancer Patients who Receive Curative Treatment
  • Impact of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy Following Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Therapy for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
  • Usefulness of Prophylactic Administration of Pegfilgrastim for Esophageal Cancer Chemotherapy: A Single-center Retrospective Study
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • glioblastoma
  • brain metastases
  • dynamic contrast-enhanced
  • perfusion
  • white matter infiltration
  • Magnetic resonance
Anticancer Research

© 2022 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire