Share this content in WeChat
Clinical Articles
Application of Sy-MRI combined with DWI in predicting MGMT methylation in glioma
MA Wenfu  GE Xin  DANG Pei  HUANG Xueying  LÜ Ruirui  ZHENG Jiarui  ZHANG Wei  WANG Xiaodong 

Cite this article as: MA W F, GE X, DANG P, et al. Application of Sy-MRI combined with DWI in predicting MGMT methylation in glioma[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2023, 14(7): 18-24, 48. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.07.004.

[Abstract] Objective To investigate the value of synthetic MRI (Sy-MRI) combined with diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) in predicting the methylation status of O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter in glioma.Materials and Methods Forty-seven patients with gliomas who underwent tumor resection in the General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University from October 2020 to December 2021 were prospectively collected. All patients were scanned by Sy-MRI and DWI sequence at the GE Architect 3.0 T superconducting MR scanner before operation. According to the pathological results of MGMT promoter methylation after the operation, they were divided into methylation group and non-methylation group. The pre-and post-enhanced Sy-MRI parameter maps (pre-T1, post-T1, pre-T2, post-T2, pre-PD and post-PD) were registered with the DWI-based apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map, and then the signal of the glioma parenchyma in the above parameter map was measured. The independent sample student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the differences between the parameters of the methylation group and the non-methylation group of MGMT promoter. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the efficacy of independent and combined diagnosis of MGMT promoter methylation, and the DeLong test was used to compare the difference of area under ROC curve (AUC).Results The values of post-T1, pre-T2, post-T2, and post-PD in the MGMT promoter methylation group were lower than those in the non-methylation group, with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). The values of pre-T1 and pre-PD had no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The ADC values in the methylation group were lower than those in the non-methylation group, with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that pre-T2 [OR=1.031, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.002-1.062, P=0.038], post-T1 (OR=1.003, 95% CI: 1.001-1.007, P=0.015) and ADC (OR=1.041, 95% CI: 1.008-1.072, P=0.047) values were independent factors for predicting MGMT methylation in gliomas. The results of ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC values of pre-T2, post-T1 and ADC for independent diagnosis of MGMT promoter methylation were 0.722, 0.808 and 0.685 respectively, and the AUC of MGMT promoter methylation diagnosed by the combined model of the above three parameters was 0.815. The results of the DeLong test showed that the diagnostic efficacy of the combined parameter model was higher than that of the ADC value, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.03). There was no significant difference between pre-T2, post-T1 and the AUC value of the combined parameter model (P>0.05).Conclusions Sy-MRI can well diagnose the methylation of the MGMT promoter in gliomas, and the diagnostic efficiency is significantly higher than that of traditional DWI. The diagnostic efficiency is higher when the Sy-MRI parameter is combined with the ADC value of DWI.
[Keywords] glioma;magnetic resonance imaging;synthetic magnetic resonance imaging;diffusion weighted imaging;O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase;methylation;predict;diagnosis

MA Wenfu1   GE Xin2   DANG Pei3   HUANG Xueying3   LÜ Ruirui1   ZHENG Jiarui1   ZHANG Wei3   WANG Xiaodong3*  

1 Clinical Medical College, Ningxia Medical University, Yinchuan 750004, China

2 The Second Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730030, China

3 Department of Radiology, General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, Yinchuan 750004, China

Corresponding author: Wang XD, E-mail:

Conflicts of interest   None.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Natural Science Foundation of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region (No. 2023AAC03557); Scientific Research Project of Health System of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region (No. 2023-NWKYP-046).
Received  2022-12-20
Accepted  2023-06-25
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.07.004
Cite this article as: MA W F, GE X, DANG P, et al. Application of Sy-MRI combined with DWI in predicting MGMT methylation in glioma[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2023, 14(7): 18-24, 48. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.07.004.

OSTROM Q T, BAUCHET L, DAVIS F G, et al. The epidemiology of glioma in adults: a "state of the science" review[J]. Neuro Oncol, 2014, 16(7): 896-913. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/nou087.
CLAUS E B, WALSH K M, WIENCKE J K, et al. Survival and low-grade glioma: the emergence of genetic information[J/OL]. Neurosurg Focus, 2015, 38(1): E6 [2022-12-19]. DOI: 10.3171/2014.10.FOCUS12367.
WELLER M, VAN DEN BENT M, PREUSSER M, et al. EANO guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diffuse gliomas of adulthood[J]. Nat Rev Clin Oncol, 2021, 18(3): 170-186. DOI: 10.1038/s41571-020-00447-z.
VAN DEN BENT M J, TESILEANU C, WICK W, et al. Adjuvant and concurrent temozolomide for 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma (CATNON; EORTC study 26053-22054): second interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2021, 22(6): 813-823. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00090-5.
LOUIS D N, PERRY A, WESSELING P, et al. The 2021 WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary[J]. Neuro Oncol, 2021, 23(8): 1231-1251. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noab106.
ELLINGSON B M, CLOUGHESY T F, POPE W B, et al. Anatomic localization of O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylated and unmethylated tumors: A radiographic study in 358 de novo human glioblastomas[J]. Neuroimage, 2012, 59(2): 908-916. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.076.
WEI J, YANG G, HAO X, et al. A multi-sequence and habitat-based MRI radiomics signature for preoperative prediction of MGMT promoter methylation in astrocytomas with prognostic implication[J]. Eur Radiol, 2019, 29(2): 877-888. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-018-5575-z.
EOLI M, MENGHI F, BRUZZONE M G, et al. Methylation of O6-Methylguanine DNA Methyltransferase and Loss of Heterozygosity on 19q and/or 17p Are Overlapping Features of Secondary Glioblastomas with Prolonged Survival[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2007, 13(9): 2606-2613. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2184.
JIANG S, RUI Q, WANG Y, et al. Discriminating MGMT promoter methylation status in patients with glioblastoma employing amide proton transfer-weighted MRI metrics[J]. Eur Radiol, 2018, 28(5): 2115-2123. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5182-4.
KICKINGEREDER P, BONEKAMP D, NOWOSIELSKI M, et al. Radiogenomics of Glioblastoma: Machine Learning-based Classification of Molecular Characteristics by Using Multiparametric and Multiregional MR Imaging Features[J]. Radiology, 2016, 281(3): 907-918. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016161382.
KICKINGEREDER P, GÖTZ M, MUSCHELLI J, et al. Large-scale Radiomic Profiling of Recurrent Glioblastoma Identifies an Imaging Predictor for Stratifying Anti-Angiogenic Treatment Response[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2016, 22(23): 5765-5771. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0702.
MARALANI P J, MYREHAUG S, MEHRABIAN H, et al. ADC, D, f dataset calculated through the simplified IVIM model, with MGMT promoter methylation, age, and ECOG, in 38 patients with wildtype IDH glioblastoma[J]. Data Brief, 2021, 35: 106950. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2021.106950.
MOON W, CHOI J W, ROH H G, et al. Imaging parameters of high grade gliomas in relation to the MGMT promoter methylation status: the CT, diffusion tensor imaging, and perfusion MR imaging[J]. Neuroradiology, 2012, 54(6): 555-563. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-011-0947-y.
YAMASHITA K, HIWATASHI A, TOGAO O, et al. MR Imaging-Based Analysis of Glioblastoma Multiforme: Estimation of IDH1 Mutation Status[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2016, 37(1): 58-65. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4491.
CHENG Y, SONG S, WEI Y, et al. Glioma Imaging by O-(2-18F-Fluoroethyl)-L-Tyrosine PET and Diffusion-Weighted MRI and Correlation With Molecular Phenotypes, Validated by PET/MR-Guided Biopsies[J]. Front Oncol, 2021, 11: 743655. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.743655.
TANENBAUM L N, TSIOURIS A J, JOHNSON A N, et al. Synthetic MRI for Clinical Neuroimaging: Results of the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) Prospective, Multicenter, Multireader Trial[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2017, 38(6): 1103-1110. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5227.
HAGIWARA A, HORI M, SUZUKI M, et al. Contrast-enhanced synthetic MRI for the detection of brain metastases[J]. Acta Radiol Open, 2016, 5(2): 1113967283. DOI: 10.1177/2058460115626757.
LI F Z, LI Q, WU S S, et al. Histogram features of quantitative parameters from synthetic MRI and ADC map in predicting the expression of Ki-67 in breast cancer[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2022, 13(7): 29-34. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.07.006.
MORAN C J. Editorial for "Investigation of synthetic relaxometry and diffusion measures in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions as compared to BI‐RADS"[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2021, 53(4): 1128-1129. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27480.
CUI Y, HAN S, LIU M, et al. Diagnosis and Grading of Prostate Cancer by Relaxation Maps From Synthetic MRI[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2020, 52(2): 552-564. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27075.
KIM M, JUNG S Y, PARK J E, et al. Diffusion-and perfusion-weighted MRI radiomics model may predict isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation and tumor aggressiveness in diffuse lower grade glioma[J]. Eur Radiol, 2020, 30(4): 2142-2151. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06548-3.
CRAWFORD F W, KHAYAL I S, MCGUE C, et al. Relationship of pre-surgery metabolic and physiological MR imaging parameters to survival for patients with untreated GBM[J]. J Neurooncol, 2009, 91(3): 337-351. DOI: 10.1007/s11060-008-9719-x.
HILARIO A, RAMOS A, PEREZ-NUÑEZ A, et al. The Added Value of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient to Cerebral Blood Volume in the Preoperative Grading of Diffuse Gliomas[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2012, 33(4): 701-707. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2846.
LOUIS D N, PERRY A, REIFENBERGER G, et al. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary[J]. Acta Neuropathol, 2016, 131(6): 803-820. DOI: 10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1.
BENGTSSON D, SCHRØDER H D, BERINDER K, et al. Tumoral MGMT content predicts survival in patients with aggressive pituitary tumors and pituitary carcinomas given treatment with temozolomide[J]. Endocrine, 2018, 62(3): 737-739. DOI: 10.1007/s12020-018-1751-9.
ILIE M D, LASOLLE H, RAVEROT G. Emerging and Novel Treatments for Pituitary Tumors[J]. J Clin Med, 2019, 8(8): 1107. DOI: 10.3390/jcm8081107.
GE X, WANG M, MA H, et al. Investigated diagnostic value of synthetic relaxometry, three-dimensional pseudo-continuous arterial spin labelling and diffusion-weighted imaging in the grading of glioma[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2022, 86: 20-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2021.11.006.
LV R R, YANG Z H, GE X, et al. Preliminary study of synthetic MRI combined with three-dimensional arterial spin labeling imaging in differentiating recurrence and pseudoprogression of glioma[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2022, 13(8): 19-23. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.08.004.
BLYSTAD I, WARNTJES J B M, SMEDBY Ö, et al. Quantitative MRI using relaxometry in malignant gliomas detects contrast enhancement in peritumoral oedema[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 17986. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-75105-6.
PARK J E, EUN D, KIM H S, et al. Generative adversarial network for glioblastoma ensures morphologic variations and improves diagnostic model for isocitrate dehydrogenase mutant type[J]. Sci Rep, 2021, 11(1): 9912. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-89477-w.
HAN Y, YAN L, WANG X, et al. Structural and advanced imaging in predicting MGMT promoter methylation of primary glioblastoma: a region of interest based analysis[J]. BMC Cancer, 2018, 18(1): 215. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4114-2.
WICK W, WELLER M, VAN DEN BENT M, et al. MGMT testing-the challenges for biomarker-based glioma treatment[J]. Nat Rev Neurol, 2014, 10(7): 372-385. DOI: 10.1038/nrneurol.2014.100.
MENG T, HE H, LIU H, et al. Investigation of the feasibility of synthetic MRI in the differential diagnosis of non-keratinising nasopharyngeal carcinoma and benign hyperplasia using different contoured methods for delineation of the region of interest[J]. Clin Radiol, 2021, 76(3): 238-239. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2020.10.010.
POPE W B, LAI A, MEHTA R, et al. Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Histogram Analysis Stratifies Progression-Free Survival in Newly Diagnosed Bevacizumab-Treated Glioblastoma[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2011, 32(5): 882-889. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2385.
GUPTA A, PRAGER A, YOUNG R J, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging and MGMT methylation status in glioblastoma: a reappraisal of the role of preoperative quantitative ADC measurements[J/OL]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2013, 34(1): E10-E11 [2022-12-19]. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3467.
CHOI Y S, AHN S S, KIM D W, et al. Incremental Prognostic Value of ADC Histogram Analysis over MGMT Promoter Methylation Status in Patients with Glioblastoma[J]. Radiology, 2016, 281(1): 175-184. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016151913.
CARLSON M R J, POPE W B, HORVATH S, et al. Relationship between Survival and Edema in Malignant Gliomas: Role of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor and Neuronal Pentraxin 2[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2007, 13(9): 2592-2598. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2772.
RUNDLE THIELE D, DAY B, STRINGER B, et al. Using the apparent diffusion coefficient to identifying MGMT promoter methylation status early in glioblastoma: importance of analytical method[J]. J Med Radiat Sci, 2015, 62(2): 92-98. DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.103.

PREV Prediction of IDH mutations in glioma based on MRI multiparametric image fusion and DenseNet network
NEXT ASL in childhood brain tumors: A Meta-analysis

Tel & Fax: +8610-67113815    E-mail: