MR Fingerprinting of Adult Brain Tumors: Initial Experience.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MR fingerprinting allows rapid simultaneous quantification of T1 and T2 relaxation times. This study assessed the utility of MR fingerprinting in differentiating common types of adult intra-axial brain tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR fingerprinting acquisition was performed in 31 patients with untreated intra-axial brain tumors: 17 glioblastomas, 6 World Health Organization grade II lower grade gliomas, and 8 metastases. T1, T2 of the solid tumor, immediate peritumoral white matter, and contralateral white matter were summarized within each ROI. Statistical comparisons on mean, SD, skewness, and kurtosis were performed by using the univariate Wilcoxon rank sum test across various tumor types. Bonferroni correction was used to correct for multiple-comparison testing. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for discrimination between glioblastomas and metastases, and area under the receiver operator curve was calculated. RESULTS: Mean T2 values could differentiate solid tumor regions of lower grade gliomas from metastases (mean, 172 ± 53 ms, and 105 ± 27 ms, respectively; P = .004, significant after Bonferroni correction). The mean T1 of peritumoral white matter surrounding lower grade gliomas differed from peritumoral white matter around glioblastomas (mean, 1066 ± 218 ms, and 1578 ± 331 ms, respectively; P = .004, significant after Bonferroni correction). Logistic regression analysis revealed that the mean T2 of solid tumor offered the best separation between glioblastomas and metastases with an area under the curve of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.69-1.00; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: MR fingerprinting allows rapid simultaneous T1 and T2 measurement in brain tumors and surrounding tissues. MR fingerprinting-based relaxometry can identify quantitative differences between solid tumor regions of lower grade gliomas and metastases and between peritumoral regions of glioblastomas and lower grade gliomas.

FDG-PET imaging in hematological malignancies.

The majority of aggressive lymphomas is characterized by an up regulated glycolytic activity, which enables the visualization by F-18 FDG-PET/CT. One-stop hybrid FDG-PET/CT combines the functional and morphologic information, outperforming both, CT and FDG-PET as separate imaging modalities. This has resulted in several recommendations using FDG-PET/CT for staging, restaging, monitoring during therapy, and assessment of treatment response as well as identification of malignant transformation. FDG-PET/CT may obviate the need for a bone marrow biopsy in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma and diffuse large B cell lymphoma. FDG-PET/CT response assessment is recommended for FDG-avid lymphomas, whereas CT-based response evaluation remains important in lymphomas with low or variable FDG avidity. The treatment induced change in metabolic activity allows for assessment of response after completion of therapy as well as prediction of outcome early during therapy. The five-point scale Deauville Criteria allows the assessment of treatment response based on visual FDG-PET analysis. Although the use of FDG-PET/CT for prediction of therapeutic response is promising it should only be conducted in the context of clinical trials. Surveillance FDG-PET/CT after complete remission is discouraged due to the relative high number of false-positive findings, which in turn may result in further unnecessary investigations. Future directions include the use of new PET tracers such as F-18 fluorothymidine (FLT), a surrogate biomarker of cellular proliferation and Ga-68 CXCR4, a chemokine receptor imaging biomarker as well as innovative digital PET/CT and PET/MRI techniques.