Funding: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, 82281966. Science and Technology Innovation Action Plan of Shanghai Science and Technology Commission, 22S31905900.

Yinwei Ying, Yajing Zhao, Dongdong Wang and Kai Quan contributed equally to this work.

Read the full text

About

PDF

Tools

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

ABSTRACT

Background

The quasi-steady-state (QUASS) algorithm improves chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) reliability, but its efficacy in detecting glioma infiltration is unclear.

Purpose

To assess apparent and QUASS CEST in visualizing glioma infiltration and predicting optimal extent-of-resection (EOR).

Study Type

Prospective.

Population

72 adult-type diffuse glioma patients (37 males, 49.57 ± 14.76 years) and 24 healthy volunteers (12 males, 48.71 ± 14.23 years).

Fieldstrength/Sequence

3 T, fast spin-echo CEST.

Assessment

Apparent and QUASS CEST effects (amide proton transfer [APT], combined magnetization transfer and nuclear overhauser enhancement and the 2-ppm chemical exchange saturation transfer peak) were calculated in solid tumor, edema, contralateral normal apparent white matter (CNAWM) in glioma patients, and white matter in healthy individuals (WMH). Comparisons were made between these four regions, high-/low-grade gliomas (HGGs/LGGs), and isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant/wild-type gliomas. Twenty-seven biopsy samples from glioblastomas and peritumoral regions were selected and traced back to the original images. Then, correlations between CEST effects, cellularity, and Ki-67 labeling index (LI) were assessed. An optimal cutoff value for the normalized ratios of QUASS APT (QUASS_rAPT) was generated.

Statistical Tests

Linear mixed models, t-test, receiver-operating characteristic analysis, and Pearson's correlation tests were used. The statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.

Results

QUASS_APT value decreased significantly from tumor solid area, edema, and CNAWM to WMH (3.887 ± 1.489, 2.556 ± 0.985, and 1.584 ± 0.462, respectively). QUASS_rAPT of solid tumor area differentiated LGGs from HGGs (1.878 ± 0.515 vs. 2.857 ± 1.026) and IDH-mutant gliomas from IDH wild-type gliomas (2.195 ± 0.769 vs. 2.875 ± 1.092). QUASS_rAPT strongly correlated with cell density and Ki-67 LI (r = 0.801 and 0.776). The optimal cutoff value of QUASS_rAPT was 1.300.

Data Conclusion

Compared to other CEST effects and apparent methods, QUASS_rAPT enhances glioma stratification and better reflects cell density and proliferative potential. A QUASS_rAPT > 1.30 optimized EOR prediction in glioblastomas.

Evidence Level

Technical Efficacy

Stage 2.

Supporting Information

References

1Q. T. Ostrom, M. Price, C. Neff, et al., “CBTRUS Statistical Report: Primary Brain and Other Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2016-2020,” Neuro-Oncology 25, no. 12 Suppl 2 (2023): iv1–iv99, https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noad149.
10.1093/neuonc/noad149
PubMed Google Scholar
2M. J. van den Bent, M. Geurts, P. J. French, et al., “Primary Brain Tumours in Adults,” Lancet 402, no. 10412 (2023): 1564–1579.
10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01054-1
PubMed Google Scholar
3K. D. Miller, Q. T. Ostrom, C. Kruchko, et al., “Brain and Other Central Nervous System Tumor Statistics, 2021,” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 71, no. 5 (2021): 381–406.
10.3322/caac.21693
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4S. Gritsch, T. T. Batchelor, and L. N. Gonzalez Castro, “Diagnostic, Therapeutic, and Prognostic Implications of the 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System,” Cancer 128, no. 1 (2022): 47–58.
10.1002/cncr.33918
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5S. Xu, L. Tang, X. Li, F. Fan, and Z. Liu, “Immunotherapy for Glioma: Current Management and Future Application,” Cancer Letters 476 (2020): 1–12.
10.1016/j.canlet.2020.02.002
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6M. Weller, P. Y. Wen, S. M. Chang, et al., “Glioma,” Nature Reviews. Disease Primers 10, no. 1 (2024): 33.
10.1038/s41572-024-00516-y
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7L. S. Bjorland, R. Mahesparan, Ø. Fluge, B. Gilje, K. Dæhli Kurz, and E. Farbu, “Impact of Extent of Resection on Outcome From Glioblastoma Using the RANO Resect Group Classification System: A Retrospective, Population-Based Cohort Study,” Neurooncol Adv 5, no. 1 (2023): vdad126.
PubMed Google Scholar
8P. Soni, M. A. Davison, J. Shao, et al., “Extent of Resection and Survival Outcomes in World Health Organization Grade II Meningiomas,” Journal of Neuro-Oncology 151, no. 2 (2021): 173–179.
10.1007/s11060-020-03632-3
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9B. M. Ellingson, P. Y. Wen, and T. F. Cloughesy, “Evidence and Context of Use for Contrast Enhancement as a Surrogate of Disease Burden and Treatment Response in Malignant Glioma,” Neuro-Oncology 20, no. 4 (2018): 457–471.
10.1093/neuonc/nox193
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10Y. Konishi, Y. Muragaki, H. Iseki, N. Mitsuhashi, and Y. Okada, “Patterns of Intracranial Glioblastoma Recurrence After Aggressive Surgical Resection and Adjuvant Management: Retrospective Analysis of 43 Cases,” Neurologia Medico-Chirurgica (Tokyo) 52, no. 8 (2012): 577–586.
10.2176/nmc.52.577
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11H. Arita, M. Kinoshita, N. Kagawa, et al., “¹¹C-Methionine Uptake and Intraoperative 5-Aminolevulinic Acid-Induced Fluorescence as Separate Index Markers of Cell Density in Glioma: A Stereotactic Image-Histological Analysis,” Cancer 118, no. 6 (2012): 1619–1627, https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26445.
10.1002/cncr.26445
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12D. W. Roberts, P. A. Valdés, B. T. Harris, et al., “Coregistered Fluorescence-Enhanced Tumor Resection of Malignant Glioma: Relationships Between δ-Aminolevulinic Acid-Induced Protoporphyrin IX Fluorescence, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Enhancement, and Neuropathological Parameters,” Clinical Article. J Neurosurg 114, no. 3 (2011): 595–603.
10.3171/2010.2.JNS091322
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13J. Zhou, J. F. Payen, D. A. Wilson, R. J. Traystman, and P. C. van Zijl, “Using the Amide Proton Signals of Intracellular Proteins and Peptides to Detect pH Effects in MRI,” Nature Medicine 9, no. 8 (2003): 1085–1090, https://doi.org/10.1038/nm907.
10.1038/nm907
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14O. Togao, T. Yoshiura, J. Keupp, et al., “Amide Proton Transfer Imaging of Adult Diffuse Gliomas: Correlation With Histopathological Grades,” Neuro-Oncology 16, no. 3 (2014): 441–448.
10.1093/neuonc/not158
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15K. Kamimura, M. Nakajo, T. Yoneyama, et al., “Histogram Analysis of Amide Proton Transfer-Weighted Imaging: Comparison of Glioblastoma and Solitary Brain Metastasis in Enhancing Tumors and Peritumoral Regions,” European Radiology 29, no. 8 (2019): 4133–4140.
10.1007/s00330-018-5832-1
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16O. Togao, C. W. Kessinger, G. Huang, et al., “Characterization of Lung Cancer by Amide Proton Transfer (APT) Imaging: An In-Vivo Study in an Orthotopic Mouse Model,” PLoS One 8, no. 10 (2013): e77019.
10.1371/journal.pone.0077019
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17A. N. Dula, B. E. Dewey, L. R. Arlinghaus, et al., “Optimization of 7-T Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Parameters for Validation of Glycosaminoglycan and Amide Proton Transfer of Fibroglandular Breast Tissue,” Radiology 275, no. 1 (2015): 255–261.
10.1148/radiol.14140762
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18P. Z. Sun, “Quasi-Steady State Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer (QUASS CEST) Analysis-Correction of the Finite Relaxation Delay and Saturation Time for Robust CEST Measurement,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 85, no. 6 (2021): 3281–3289.
10.1002/mrm.28653
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19P. Z. Sun, “Quasi-Steady-State CEST (QUASS CEST) Solution Improves the Accuracy of CEST Quantification: QUASS CEST MRI-Based Omega Plot Analysis,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 86, no. 2 (2021): 765–776.
10.1002/mrm.28744
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Y. Wu, Z. Liu, Q. Yang, et al., “Fast and Equilibrium CEST Imaging of Brain Tumor Patients at 3T,” Neuroimage Clin 33 (2022): 102890.
10.1016/j.nicl.2021.102890
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21P. Z. Sun, J. Lu, Y. Wu, G. Xiao, and R. Wu, “Evaluation of the Dependence of CEST-EPI Measurement on Repetition Time, RF Irradiation Duty Cycle and Imaging Flip Angle for Enhanced pH Sensitivity,” Physics in Medicine and Biology 58, no. 17 (2013): N229–N240.
10.1088/0031-9155/58/17/N229
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Y. W. Park, P. Vollmuth, M. Foltyn-Dumitru, et al., “The 2021 WHO Classification for Gliomas and Implications on Imaging Diagnosis: Part 1-Key Points of the Fifth Edition and Summary of Imaging Findings on Adult-Type Diffuse Gliomas,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 58, no. 3 (2023): 677–689.
10.1002/jmri.28743
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23X. Li, Y. Lu, L. Liu, et al., “Predicting Peritumoral Edema Development After Gamma Knife Radiosurgery of Meningiomas Using Machine Learning Methods: A Multicenter Study,” European Radiology 33, no. 12 (2023): 8912–8924.
10.1007/s00330-023-09955-9
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24M. Kim, J. Gillen, B. A. Landman, J. Zhou, and P. C. van Zijl, “Water Saturation Shift Referencing (WASSR) for Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer (CEST) Experiments,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 61, no. 6 (2009): 1441–1450, https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.21873.
10.1002/mrm.21873
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25J. Zhang, W. Zhu, R. Tain, X. J. Zhou, and K. Cai, “Improved Differentiation of Low-Grade and High-Grade Gliomas and Detection of Tumor Proliferation Using APT Contrast Fitted From Z-Spectrum,” Molecular Imaging and Biology 20, no. 4 (2018): 623–631.
10.1007/s11307-017-1154-y
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26K. Cai, A. Singh, H. Poptani, et al., “CEST Signal at 2ppm (CEST@2ppm) From Z-Spectral Fitting Correlates With Creatine Distribution in Brain Tumor,” NMR in Biomedicine 28, no. 1 (2015): 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.3216.
10.1002/nbm.3216
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27K. L. Desmond, F. Moosvi, and G. J. Stanisz, “Mapping of Amide, Amine, and Aliphatic Peaks in the CEST Spectra of Murine Xenografts at 7 T,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 71, no. 5 (2014): 1841–1853.
10.1002/mrm.24822
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
28P. A. Yushkevich, J. Piven, H. C. Hazlett, et al., “User-Guided 3D Active Contour Segmentation of Anatomical Structures: Significantly Improved Efficiency and Reliability,” NeuroImage 31, no. 3 (2006): 1116–1128.
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29P. Bankhead, M. B. Loughrey, J. A. Fernández, et al., “QuPath: Open Source Software for Digital Pathology Image Analysis,” Scientific Reports 7, no. 1 (2017): 16878.
10.1038/s41598-017-17204-5
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30X. Y. Zhang, Y. Zhai, Z. Jin, C. Li, P. Z. Sun, and Y. Wu, “Preliminary Demonstration of In Vivo Quasi-Steady-State CEST Postprocessing-Correction of Saturation Time and Relaxation Delay for Robust Quantification of Tumor MT and APT Effects,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 86, no. 2 (2021): 943–953.
10.1002/mrm.28764
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
31J. J. Miller, “Targeting IDH-Mutant Glioma,” Neurotherapeutics 19, no. 6 (2022): 1724–1732.
10.1007/s13311-022-01238-3
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
32K. Yan, Z. Fu, C. Yang, et al., “Assessing Amide Proton Transfer (APT) MRI Contrast Origins in 9 L Gliosarcoma in the Rat Brain Using Proteomic Analysis,” Molecular Imaging and Biology 17, no. 4 (2015): 479–487.
10.1007/s11307-015-0828-6
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33H. Guo, J. Liu, J. Hu, et al., “Diagnostic Performance of Gliomas Grading and IDH Status Decoding A Comparison Between 3D Amide Proton Transfer APT and Four Diffusion-Weighted MRI Models,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 56, no. 6 (2022): 1834–1844.
10.1002/jmri.28211
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
34F. Sahm, D. Capper, A. Jeibmann, et al., “Addressing Diffuse Glioma as a Systemic Brain Disease With Single-Cell Analysis,” Archives of Neurology 69, no. 4 (2012): 523–526, https://doi.org/10.1001/archneurol.2011.2910.
10.1001/archneurol.2011.2910
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
35K. Jütten, V. Mainz, S. Gauggel, et al., “Diffusion Tensor Imaging Reveals Microstructural Heterogeneity of Normal-Appearing White Matter and Related Cognitive Dysfunction in Glioma Patients,” Frontiers in Oncology 9 (2019): 536.
10.3389/fonc.2019.00536
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36N. Sanai and M. S. Berger, “Glioma Extent of Resection and Its Impact on Patient Outcome,” Neurosurgery 62, no. 4 (2008): 753–766.
10.1227/01.neu.0000318159.21731.cf
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
37K. S. Patel, J. Yao, N. S. Cho, et al., “pH-Weighted Amine Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Echo Planar Imaging Visualizes Infiltrating Glioblastoma Cells,” Neuro-Oncology 26, no. 1 (2024): 115–126.
10.1093/neuonc/noad150
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38S. Tejada, M. V. Becerra-Castro, J. Nuñez-Cordoba, and R. Díez-Valle, “Ki-67 Proliferative Activity in the Tumor Margins as a Robust Prognosis Factor in Glioblastoma Patients,” J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 82, no. 1 (2021): 53–58.
10.1055/s-0040-1709730
PubMed Google Scholar
39M. Rakovec, A. M. Khalafallah, O. Wei, et al., “A Consensus Definition of Supratotal Resection for Anatomically Distinct Primary Glioblastoma: An AANS/CNS Section on Tumors Survey of Neurosurgical Oncologists,” Journal of Neuro-Oncology 159, no. 2 (2022): 233–242.
10.1007/s11060-022-04048-x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
40M. Weller, M. van den Bent, M. Preusser, et al., “EANO Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diffuse Gliomas of Adulthood,” Nature Reviews. Clinical Oncology 18, no. 3 (2021): 170–186.
10.1038/s41571-020-00447-z
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
41R. Scheidegger, E. T. Wong, and D. C. Alsop, “Contributors to Contrast Between Glioma and Brain Tissue in Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Sensitive Imaging at 3 Tesla,” NeuroImage 99 (2014): 256–268.
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.036
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
42P. C. M. van Zijl, W. W. Lam, J. Xu, L. Knutsson, and G. J. Stanisz, “Magnetization Transfer Contrast and Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer MRI. Features and Analysis of the Field-Dependent Saturation Spectrum,” NeuroImage 168 (2018): 222–241.
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.04.045
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
43C. Su, J. Jiang, C. Liu, et al., “Comparison of Amide Proton Transfer Imaging and Magnetization Transfer Imaging in Revealing Glioma Grades and Proliferative Activities: A Histogram Analysis,” Neuroradiology 63, no. 5 (2021): 685–693.
10.1007/s00234-020-02547-0
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
44K. Wang, J. Huang, L. Ju, et al., “Creatine Mapping of the Brain at 3T by CEST MRI,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 91, no. 1 (2024): 51–60.
10.1002/mrm.29876
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
45K. Wang, L. Ju, Y. Song, et al., “Whole-Cerebrum Guanidino and Amide CEST Mapping at 3 T by a 3D Stack-Of-Spirals Gradient Echo Acquisition,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 92, no. 4 (2024): 1456–1470.
10.1002/mrm.30134
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
46C. Su, S. Xu, D. Lin, et al., “Multi-Parametric Z-Spectral MRI May Have a Good Performance for Glioma Stratification in Clinical Patients,” European Radiology 32, no. 1 (2022): 101–111.
10.1007/s00330-021-08175-3
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
47A. Rashidi, L. K. Billingham, A. Zolp, et al., “Myeloid Cell-Derived Creatine in the Hypoxic Niche Promotes Glioblastoma Growth,” Cell Metabolism 36, no. 1 (2024): 62–77.e68.
10.1016/j.cmet.2023.11.013
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Volume62, Issue2

August 2025

Pages 480-493

The Application of Quasi-Steady-State Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Imaging in the Visualization of Glioma Infiltration and the Optimal Extent of Resection Establishment

ABSTRACT

Background

Purpose

Study Type

Population

Fieldstrength/Sequence

Assessment

Statistical Tests

Results

Data Conclusion

Evidence Level

Technical Efficacy

Supporting Information

References

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

The Application of Quasi-Steady-State Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Imaging in the Visualization of Glioma Infiltration and the Optimal Extent of Resection Establishment

ABSTRACT

Background

Purpose

Study Type

Population

Fieldstrength/Sequence

Assessment

Statistical Tests

Results

Data Conclusion

Evidence Level

Technical Efficacy

Supporting Information

References

References

Related

Information