分享:
分享到微信朋友圈
X
临床研究
联合DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI预测成人弥漫性胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失
曲源 田慧 张旭 李贤军

Cite this article as: QU Y, TIAN H, ZHANG X, et al. Prediction of 1p/19q co-deletion in adult diffuse glioma using combined DKI, FW-DTI, and MAP-MRI[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2026, 17(4): 56-61.本文引用格式:曲源, 田慧, 张旭, 等. 联合DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI预测成人弥漫性胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失[J]. 磁共振成像, 2026, 17(4): 56-61. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2026.04.008.


[摘要] 目的 探讨联合扩散峰度成像(diffusion kurtosis imaging, DKI)、自由水扩散张量成像(free water diffusion tensor imaging, FW-DTI)及平均表观传播子磁共振成像(mean apparent propagator magnetic resonance imaging, MAP-MRI)在预测成人弥漫性胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失中的价值。材料与方法 回顾性分析经手术病理证实的72例胶质瘤患者的临床、病理及影像资料。根据1p/19q的共缺失状态分为共缺失组(n=32)及未缺失组(n=40)。术前行常规MRI及基于q空间的扩散谱成像(diffusion spectrum imaging, DSI),后处理获得DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI的参数图。比较两组患者的临床特征、常规MRI表现及各扩散模型参数的差异。使用受试者工作特性(receiver operating characteristic, ROC)曲线评价各参数的在预测胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失中的价值,并计算曲线下面积(area under the curve, AUC)。结果 两组MRI表现中,肿瘤境界不清楚存在差异,而其他临床特征及MRI表现差异无统计学意义。1p/19q共缺失组胶质瘤的平均峰度(mean kurtosis, MK)、细胞外自由水分数(extracellular free water fraction, FWF)、细胞外水分子返回原点概率(extracellular water molecule return-to-origin probability, RTOP)及非高斯分布指数(non-Gaussian index, NG)值高于未缺失组(t值分别为4.913, 4.376, 3.761及6.916,P<0.05),而自由水校正各向异性分数(free water-corrected anisotropy fraction, FW-FA)及q空间逆方差(q-space inverse variance, QIV)值则低于未缺失组(t值分别为2.945及3.761,P<0.05),其他参数之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。联合MK、FWF及NG对胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失预测的AUC值为0.935,敏感度为85.00%,特异度为93.75%。结论 联合DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI多参数分析可术前预测胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失的状态,可协助临床制订个体化的治疗方案。
[Abstract] Objective To investigate the value of combined diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), free water diffusion tensor imaging (FW-DTI), and mean apparent propagator magnetic resonance imaging (MAP-MRI) in predicting 1p/19q co-deletion in adult diffuse gliomas.Materials and Methods Clinical, pathological, and imaging features from 72 glioma patients with surgically confirmed pathology were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into the co-deletion group (n=32) and non-co-deletion group (n=40) based on 1p/19q co-deletion status. Preoperative conventional MRI and q-space diffusion spectrum imaging (DSI) were performed, with post-processing generating DKI, FW-DTI, and MAP-MRI parameter maps. Clinical characteristics, conventional MRI features, and differences in diffusion model parameters were compared between groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were utilized to evaluate the predictive value of each parameter for 1p/19q co-deletion in gliomas, with area under curve (AUC) values calculated.Results Among MRI features, tumor margin indistinctness differed significantly between groups, while other clinical characteristics and MRI features showed no statistically differences. The 1p/19q-deleted group exhibited higher mean kurtosis (MK), extracellular free water fraction (FWF), extracellular water molecule return-to-origin probability (RTOP), and non-Gaussian index (NG) values compared to the non-deleted group (t-values were 4.913, 4.376, 3.761, and 6.916, respectively, with P < 0.05.). Conversely, the free water-corrected anisotropy fraction (FW-FA) and q-space inverse variance (QIV) values were lower in the deleted group (t-values were 2.945 and 3.761, with P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in other parameters (P > 0.05). The combined AUC value for predicting 1p/19q co-deletion using MK, FWF, and NG was 0.935, with a sensitivity of 85.00% and specificity of 93.75%.Conclusions The combination of DKI, FW-DTI, and MAP-MRI can predict the status of 1p/19q co-deletion in gliomas preoperatively, facilitating the development of individualized treatment plans.
[关键词] 胶质瘤;1p/19q共缺失;磁共振成像;扩散峰度成像;自由水扩散张量成像;平均表观传播子
[Keywords] glioma;1p/19q co-deletion;magnetic resonance imaging;diffusion kurtosis imaging;free water diffusion tensor imaging;mean apparent propagator

曲源 1, 2   田慧 2   张旭 2   李贤军 1*  

1 西安交通大学第一附属医院医学影像科,西安 710061

2 新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院放射影像中心,乌鲁木齐 830000

通信作者:李贤军,E-mail: xianj.li@mail.xjtu.edu.cn

作者贡献声明::李贤军设计本研究的方案,对稿件的重要内容进行了修改;曲源起草和撰写稿件,获取、分析或解释本研究的数据;田慧、张旭获取、分析或解释本研究的数据,并对稿件的重要内容进行了修改;全体作者都同意发表最后的修改稿,同意对本研究的所有方面负责,确保本研究的准确性和诚信。


收稿日期:2025-12-02
接受日期:2026-03-16
中图分类号:R445.2  R730.264 
文献标识码:A
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2026.04.008
本文引用格式:曲源, 田慧, 张旭, 等. 联合DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI预测成人弥漫性胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失[J]. 磁共振成像, 2026, 17(4): 56-61. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2026.04.008.

0 引言

       根据2021年世界卫生组织(World Health Organization, WHO)脑肿瘤分类标准,肿瘤分类要兼顾组织病理级别及分子基因信息[1, 2]。其中,胶质瘤最主要的分子标志物是异柠檬酸脱氢酶(isocitrate dehydrogenase, IDH)及1号染色体短臂和19号染色体长臂(1p/19q)的共缺失。研究表明,无论肿瘤级别高低,存在1p/19q共缺失的肿瘤对放化疗更为敏感,且远期生存期更高[3, 4, 5]。然而目前临床上,基因表型的诊断均需依赖于活检或术后病理,缺乏早期无创的检测方法。

       近年来,MRI已成为胶质瘤诊断、治疗及预后随访的主要检查手段,其中,扩散加权成像(diffusion weighted imaging, DWI)能评估水分子在组织内运动情况,可间接反映肿瘤内的细胞密度。然而,其理论模型基于高斯分布,因此在揭示肿瘤内部复杂结构时存在不足。扩散峰度成像(diffusion kurtosis imaging, DKI)是基于非高斯分布的扩散模型,其对肿瘤内部水分子扩散运动的描述优于传统DWI[6]。已有研究报道DKI在预测胶质瘤基因表型中有一定价值,但不同研究之间仍存在争议[7, 8]。自由水扩散张量成像(free water diffusion tensor imaging, FW-DTI)在传统DTI的基础上,去除自由水对信号的污染而特异性的评价组织内水分子扩散过程[9]。FW-DTI基于双室的扩散张量模型,即包括细胞内水分子的椭球张量模型及细胞外自由水的球张量模型[10]。平均表观传播子磁共振成像(mean apparent propagator magnetic resonance imaging, MAP-MRI)通过测量水分子自旋位移的概率密度函数(probability density function, PDF)反映组织微观结构[11, 12]。上述扩散模型定量参数可通过基于q空间的扩散频谱成像(diffusion spectrum imaging, DSI)一站式获取[13, 14]。本研究将探讨联合DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI在预测胶质瘤1p/19q状态中的价值。

1 材料与方法

1.1 一般资料

       回顾性纳入2023年6月至2025年12月在新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院就诊的胶质瘤患者。纳入标准:(1)根据2021年WHO中枢神经系统分类标准,术后病理证实为胶质瘤,且获取了IDH及1p/19q分子信息;(2)年龄>18岁;(3)术前均行常规MRI平扫增强及DSI扫描。排除标准:(1)图像质量差,伪影明显,无法测量;(2)MR检查前接受过治疗;(3)资料不全者。最终纳入72例患者,根据1p/19q是否共缺失分为两组。其中,1p/19q共缺失组(1p/19q codel)32例,未缺失组(1p/19q Non-codel)40例。本研究遵守《赫尔辛基宣言》,经新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院伦理委员会批准(批准文号:KY2025121101),免除受试者知情同意。

1.2 仪器与方法

       采用德国Siemens 3.0 T Vida磁共振扫描仪,32通道头颈联合相控阵线圈。常规扫描序列包括轴/矢/冠状位T2WI、T1WI及T2液体抑制翻转恢复(fluid attenuated inversion recovery, FLAIR)序列。(1)T2WI扫描参数:FOV 230 mm×230 mm,TR 5000 ms,TE 110 ms,层厚5 mm,层间隔1 mm,矩阵384×384;(2)T1WI扫描参数:FOV 230 mm×230 mm,TR 700 ms,TE 20 ms,层厚5 mm,层间隔1 mm,矩阵320×256;(3)T2-FLAIR序列扫描参数:FOV 230 mm×230 mm,TR 8000 ms,TE 120 ms,层厚5 mm,层间隔1 mm,矩阵320×256;增强序列为3D T1磁化准备快速梯度回波(magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo, MPRAGE)序列,参数如下:FOV 240 mm×240 mm,TR 2300 ms,TE 2.3 ms,层厚1 mm,矩阵240×240;DSI扫描参数如下:FOV 240 mm×240 mm,TR 3200 ms,TE 87 ms,层厚2 mm,矩阵110×110,b值分别为250、500、750、1000、1250、1500、2000、2250、2500、2750、3000、3250、3500及4000 s/mm2,方向数分别为3、6、4、3、12、12、6、15、12、12、4、12、24和3,扫描时间6 min 57 s。

1.3 图像分析

       两名分别有6年及10年神经影像诊断经验的主治医师对常规影像表现进行评判,存在分歧时由一名副主任医师最终判定。评判内容包括:(1)肿瘤发生部位,肿瘤主体所在的脑区;(2)肿瘤边界,边界清楚是指肿瘤与周围正常组织分界清楚,边界不清则是肿瘤与正常组织分界不明确;(3)强化特征,均匀强化是指肿瘤整体强化程度趋于一致,不均匀强化是指肿瘤内部区域强化程度不一致,未见强化是指增强后肿瘤信号与增强前一致。DSI图像后处理使用开源软件DIPY(Diffusion Imaging in Python,https://dipy.org/),分别获取DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI参数图。DKI参数包括平均峰度(mean kurtosis, MK)、平均扩散系数(mean diffusion, MD)、轴向峰度(axial kurtosis, AK)及径向峰度(radial kurtosis, RK);FW-DTI参数包括细胞外自由水分数(free water fraction, FWF)及自由水校正各向异性分数(free water corrected fractional anisotropy, FW-FA);MAP-MRI参数包括均方位移(mean square displacement, MSD)、q空间逆方差(q-space inverse variance, QIV)、返回原点概率(return to the origin probability, RTOP)、返回轴概率(return to the axis probability, RTAP)、返回平面概率(return to the plane probability, RTPP)及非高斯分布指数(non-Gaussian index, NG)。参数测量由上述两位医师采用双盲法完成,各自将所有参数图导入ITK-SNAP软件(www.itksnap.org,版本4.0.2),并以3D MPRAGE增强图像作为参考,在参数图上显示病灶的最大层面上选择3个感兴趣区(region of interest, ROI)进行勾画及测量,ROI大小范围为15~25 mm2,勾画时尽量避开坏死、囊变及正常组织。取3个ROI的平均值作为肿瘤实质的测量结果。同时,为了克服个体差异,将在病灶上勾画的ROI镜像复制到对侧正常白质并测量参数值,将病变参数值除以正常白质参数值作为最终结果(图1)。测量完成后由上述副主任医师对ROI选择及测量结果进行审核。

图1  男,45岁,右额叶少突胶质细胞瘤,WHO CNS 2级,IDH突变,1p/19q共缺失。1A:T2-FLAIR上肿瘤呈混杂高信号,边界清楚;1B:T1增强未见强化;1C:MK图;1D:FWF图;1E:FW-FA图;1F:QIV图;1G:RTOP图;1H:NG图。WHO:世界卫生组织;CNS:中枢神经系统;IDH:异柠檬酸脱氢酶;FLAIR:液体抑制翻转恢复;MK:平均峰度;FWF:细胞外自由水分数;FW-FA:自由水校正各向异性分数;QIV:q空间逆方差;RTOP:返回原点概率;NG:非高斯分布指数。
Fig. 1  Male, 45 years old, right frontal lobe oligodendroglioma, WHO CNS grade 2, IDH-mutant, 1p/19q co-deletion. 1A: T2-FLAIR shows heterogeneous signal intensity with well-defined margins; 1B: T1-weighted contrast-enhanced sequence shows no enhancement; 1C: MK map; 1D: FWF map; 1E: FW-FA map; 1F: QIV map; 1G: RTOP map; 1H: NG map. WHO: World Health Organization; CNS: central nervous system; IDH: isocitrate dehydrogenase; FLAIR: fluid attenuated inversion recovery; MK: mean kurtosis; FWF: free water fraction; FW-FA: free water corrected fractional anisotropy; QIV: q-space inverse variance; RTOP: return to the origin probability; NG: non-Gaussian index.

1.4 统计学方法

       使用SPSS 23.0及R4.2.0软件进行统计分析。首先采用组内相关系数(intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC)评价两名医师测量结果的一致性,ICC>0.8表明一致性较好。计数资料对比采用χ2检验或Fisher精确概率法。符合正态分布的计量资料以均数±标准差表示,不符合正态分布的计量资料以中位数(上下四分位数)表示,使用t检验(正态分布)或Mann-Whitney U检验(非正态分布)对比中枢神经系统(central nervous system, CNS)2、3级胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失组及未缺失组的差异。绘制各参数受试者工作特征(receiver operating characteristic, ROC)曲线,计算曲线下面积(area under the curve, AUC)值及95%置信区间(confidence interval, CI)。P<0.05表示差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 测量结果一致性分析

       两名医师各参数测量结果的ICC值均大于0.815,一致性较好。

2.2 两组患者临床病理特征及常规MRI表现对比

       在临床资料中,两组之间年龄、性别及病理级别分布差异均无统计学意义。在MRI表现中,1p/19q共缺失组肿瘤边界不清楚更为常见(P<0.05),而其他影像表现差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。详细比较结果见表1

表1  1p/19q共缺失组与未缺失组临床病理及常规MRI表现对比
Tab. 1  Comparison of clinical, pathology and routine MRI features between 1p/19q co-deletion and non-deletion groups

2.3 两组患者扩散参数对比

       在CNS 2级胶质瘤中,1p/19q共缺失组的MK、MD、FWF、RTOP及NG值高于未缺失组,而FW-FA、QIV及RTPP值则低于未缺失组(P<0.05),其他参数之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在CNS 3级胶质瘤中,1p/19q共缺失组的MK、FWF、RTOP及NG值高于未缺失组,而FW-FA及QIV值则低于未缺失组(P<0.05),其他参数之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。1p/19q共缺失胶质瘤常规MRI表现及部分扩散参数见图1,各级别两组参数详细对比见表2。所有级别存在差异的整体参数对比见图2,图示两组之间MK差异最大,各参数未见明显离群值。

图2  胶质瘤(CNS 2~3 级)1p/19q 共缺失组(1p/19q codel)与未缺失组(1p/19q Non-codel)参数对比图(肿瘤/对侧正常白质)。2A:MK 图;2B:FWF图;2C:FW-FA 图;2D:QIV 图;2E:RTOP 图;2F:NG图。CNS:中枢神经系统;MK:平均峰度;FWF:细胞外自由水分数;FW-FA:自由水校正各向异性分数;QIV:q 空间逆方差;RTOP:返回原点概率;NG:非高斯分布指数。
Fig. 2  Parameter comparison between the 1p/19q codel group (1p/19q codel) and non-deletion group (1p/19q non-codel) in gliomas (CNS grade 2-3) (tumor/contralateral normal white matter). 2A: MK map; 2B: FWF map; 2C: FW-FA map; 2D: QIV map; 2E: RTOP map; 2F: NG map. CNS: central nervous system; MK: mean kurtosis; FWF: free water fraction; FW-FA: free water corrected fractional anisotropy; QIV: q-space inverse variance; RTOP: return to the origin probability; NG: non-Gaussian index.
表2  CNS 2级和3级胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失组与未缺失组DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI参数对比(肿瘤/对侧正常白质)
Tab. 2  Comparison of DKI, FW-DTI, and MAP-MRI parameters between CNS grade 2 and 3 gliomas with 1p/19q co-deletion and non-deletion groups tumor/contralateral normal white matter

2.4 各参数预测1p/19q分子分型的效能

       上述差异有统计学意义的参数预测胶质瘤(CNS 2~3级)1p/19q共缺失的诊断效能见表3。在DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI的参数中,MK、FWF及NG分别在各序列中AUC值最高。联合MK、FWF及NG预测1p/19q共缺失的AUC值为0.935,敏感度为85.00%,特异度为93.75%。

表3  各参数预测胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失的诊断效能分析(肿瘤/对侧正常白质)
Tab. 3  Diagnostic performance analysis of parameters predicting 1p/19q co-deletion in gliomas (tumor/contralateral normal white matter)

3 讨论

       本研究探讨联合DKI、FW-DTI及MAP-MRI多种扩散模型在预测胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失中的价值。结果表明,无论肿瘤级别,两组之间MK、FWF、FW-FA、QIV、RTOP及NG值差异有统计学意义,联合MK、FWF及NG在预测胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失中的具有较高的诊断效能。

3.1 常规MRI及DWI预测胶质瘤1p/19q缺失状态

       常规MRI影像表现在预测胶质瘤1p/19q共缺失中的价值已有报道,如好发于额叶、易发生钙化、边界不清等[15]。其中,“T2 FLAIR错配征”是目前发现预测IDH突变并1p/19q未缺失最有特异性的征象。这一征象是指肿瘤在T2上整体表现为均匀或接近均匀的高信号,而在T2 FLAIR上边缘为高信号,中心则为均匀或接近均匀的低信号[16, 17]。在明确IDH突变前提下,T2 FLAIR错配征在预测1p/19q未缺失上有很高的特异度,甚至接近100%,但敏感度却较低,仅为42%[18]。YANG等[19]比较了1p/19q共缺失和未缺失肿瘤的表观扩散系数(apparent diffusion coefficient, ADC),表明两组之间ADC值差异有统计学意义。此外,MA等[20]研究表明,1p/19q未缺失肿瘤的最小ADC值高于共缺失组。然而,JOYNER等[21]的研究却发现ADC值并不能鉴别肿瘤是否存在1p/19q共缺失。因此,单一ADC值在预测1p/19q共缺失状态的效能仍存在争议。

3.2 高阶扩散模型预测胶质瘤1p/19q缺失状态

       为了更好地反映胶质瘤内部的微观结构和异质性,学者们提出了多种高阶扩散模型。DKI是反映非高斯分布的扩散模型,MK越大,表明水分子越偏离高斯分布,组织内部越复杂。以往研究表明,胶质瘤级别越高,MK值也相应增加[22]。本研究中,无论按所有肿瘤分组,还是按肿瘤分级亚组,1p/19q共缺失组的MK值均高于未缺失组。这可能是因为相比未缺失组,共缺失的肿瘤实质区细胞密度更大,且周围微血管排列密集,灌注更为丰富,同时钙化及囊变发生率更高。上述微观结构及病理改变均导致水分子扩散更为复杂,MK值升高,这与以往研究结果类似[23]。FW-DTI将信号变化分解为神经元变性或炎症导致的结构变化及细胞外自由水扩散运动,因此克服了自由水对传统DTI参数FA值的影响,因此能更好地反映组织微观结构[24]。JING等[25]研究发现FW-DTI在评估肝豆状核变性脑微观结构改变中有一定价值,但在胶质瘤应用方面,国内外尚未见报道。本研究中,1p/19q共缺失组的FWF值升高,而FW-FA值降低。这可能因为少突胶质细胞瘤对白质轴突等的破坏更为明显,导致细胞外水分子含量升高以及FA降低。MAP-MRI理论上是揭示复杂结构最为准确的扩散模型,本研究中,1p/19q共缺失组的QIV值低于非缺失组,而RTOP及NG值高于非缺失组。QIV反映因组织复杂所致的扩散受限,RTOP与病灶内细胞排布的密集程度相关,NG则体现组织内的腔室结构。1p/19q共缺失组的肿瘤细胞密度更大,易发生钙化,且肿瘤内含有大量“微囊样”结构产生较多腔室结构,导致上述参数的变化[26, 27]

3.3 本研究的局限性

       (1)单中心回顾性研究,样本量较少,且按分级分为亚组后病例数更少,下一步可联合多中心进行大样本前瞻性研究,已提升研究结果的可靠性及临床推广性;(2)胶质瘤异质性高,手动勾画ROI与病理采样区可能存在不一致,后续可使用影像组学等客观性更好的方法[29, 30];(3)DSI技术目前仍处于探索阶段,扫描参数尚无标准,且扫描时间长,目前尚无法进行临床推广,后续将结合临床及预后资料,探讨成像参数在生存期及预后评估的可行性。

4 结论

       总之,基于DSI的扩散模型能反映胶质瘤的微观结构,联合MK、FWF及NG值在预测肿瘤1p/19q共缺失上表现出较高的诊断效能,这对于术前治疗方案的选择具有一定的指导意义。

[1]
BERGER T R, WEN P Y, LANG-ORSINI M, et al. World Health Organization 2021 classification of central nervous system tumors and implications for therapy for adult-type gliomas: A review[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2022, 8(10): 1493-1501. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2844.
[2]
LIM-FAT M J, BENNETT J, OSTROM Q, et al. Central nervous system tumors in adolescents and young adults: A Society for Neuro-Oncology Consensus Review on diagnosis, management, and future directions[J]. Neuro Oncol, 2025, 27(1): 13-32. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noae186.
[3]
FAMILIARI P, LAPOLLA P, PICOTTI V, et al. Role of 1p/19q codeletion in diffuse low-grade glioma tumor prognosis[J]. Anticancer Res, 2023, 43(6): 2659-2670. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.16432.
[4]
VAN DER VAART T, WIJNENGA M M J, VAN GARDEREN K, et al. Differences in the prognostic role of age, extent of resection, and tumor grade between astrocytoma IDHmt and oligodendroglioma: A single-center cohort study[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2024, 30(17): 3837-3844. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-0901.
[5]
POGOSBEKIAN E L, PRONIN I N, ZAKHAROVA N E, et al. Feasibility of generalised diffusion kurtosis imaging approach for brain glioma grading[J]. Neuroradiology, 2021, 63(8): 1241-1251. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-020-02613-7.
[6]
PANG H, DANG X, REN Y, et al. DKI can distinguish high-grade gliomas from IDH1-mutant low-grade gliomas and correlate with their different nuclear-to-cytoplasm ratio: a localized biopsy-based study[J]. Eur Radiol, 2024, 34(11): 7539-7551. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10325-8.
[7]
王萍, 黄欢, 武超颖, 等. DKI、IVIM结合临床及常规MRI特征预测胶质瘤IDH1及1p/19q分子分型的价值[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2025, 44(1): 33-40. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2025.01.017.
WANG P, HUANG H, WU C Y, et al. The value of DKI and IVIM combined with clinical and conventional MRI features in predicting glioma IDH1 and 1p/19q molecular typing[J]. Journal of Clinical Radiology, 2025, 44(1): 33-40. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2025.01.017.
[8]
CHU J P, SONG Y K, TIAN Y S, et al. Diffusion kurtosis imaging in evaluating gliomas: different region of interest selection methods on time efficiency, measurement repeatability, and diagnostic ability[J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(2): 729-739. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07204-x.
[9]
ALMAIRAC F, PARKER D, MONDAT L, et al. Improvement of diffusion tensor imaging-based tractography by free-water correction in nonedematous gliomas: assessment with brain mapping[J]. J Neurosurg, 2024, 141(3): 684-694. DOI: 10.3171/2024.1.JNS23568.
[10]
丁凯玥, 申雨, 白岩, 等. 基于自由水成像对早期震颤型帕金森病白质纤维束的研究[J]. 磁共振成像, 2025, 16(1): 81-88. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.01.013.
DING K Y, SHEN Y, BAI Y, et al. Free water imaging in white matter of early-stage tremor-dominant Parkinson's disease[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2025, 16(1): 81-88. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.01.013.
[11]
XIE S H, LANG R, LI B, et al. Evaluation of diffuse glioma grade and proliferation activity by different diffusion-weighted-imaging models including diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) and mean apparent propagator (MAP) MRI[J]. Neuroradiology, 2023, 65(1): 55-64. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-022-03000-0.
[12]
SHE D, HUANG H, GUO W, et al. Grading meningiomas with diffusion metrics: a comparison between diffusion kurtosis, mean apparent propagator, neurite orientation dispersion and density, and diffusion tensor imaging[J]. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(5): 3671-3681. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09505-3.
[13]
ZHANG Y, ZHANG Z, JIA X, et al. Imaging parameters of the ipsilateral medial geniculate body may predict prognosis of patients with idiopathic unilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss on the basis of diffusion spectrum imaging[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2021, 42(1): 152-159. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6874.
[14]
ZHANG J K, JAYASEKERA D, SONG C, et al. Diffusion basis spectrum imaging provides insights into cervical spondylotic myelopathy pathology[J]. Neurosurgery, 2023, 92(1): 102-109. DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002183.
[15]
闫珲, 张辉. MRI在基于IDH和1p/19q分型较低级别胶质瘤诊疗中的研究进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2023, 14(4): 137-141. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.04.024.
YAN H, ZHANG H. Research progress of MRI in diagnosis and treatment of lower grade glioma based on IDH and 1p/19q classification[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imag, 2023, 14(4): 137-141. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.04.024.
[16]
DAGHER S A, LOCHNER R H, OZKARA B B, et al. The T2-FLAIR mismatch sign in oncologic neuroradiology: History, current use, emerging data, and future directions[J]. Neuroradiol J, 2024, 37(4): 441-453. DOI: 10.1177/19714009231212375.
[17]
王瀚苇, 曾琳岚, 陈立朝, 等. 磁共振T2-FLAIR错配征在预测较低级别胶质瘤分子分型中的研究进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2022, 13(9): 136-138. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.09.032.
WANG H W, ZENG L L, CHEN L C, et al. Research progress of T2-FLAIR mismatch sign in predicting molecular typing of lower-grade glioma[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2022, 13(9): 136-138. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2022.09.032.
[18]
PARK S I, SUH C H, GUENETTE J P, et al. The T2-FLAIR mismatch sign as a predictor of IDH-mutant, 1p/19q-noncodeleted lower-grade gliomas: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis[J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(7): 5289-5299. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07467-4.
[19]
YANG X, LIN Y, XING Z, et al. Predicting 1p/19q codeletion status using diffusion-, susceptibility-, perfusion-weighted, and conventional MRI in IDH-mutant lower-grade gliomas[J]. Acta Radiol, 2021, 62(12): 1657-1665. DOI: 10.1177/0284185120973624.
[20]
MA X, CHENG K, CHENG G, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient as imaging biomarker for identifying IDH mutation, 1p19q codeletion, and MGMT promoter methylation status in patients with glioma[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2023, 58(3): 732-738. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.28589.
[21]
JOYNER D A, GARRETT J, BATCHALA P P, et al. MRI features predict tumor grade in isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant astrocytoma and oligodendroglioma[J]. Neuroradiology, 2023, 65(1):121-129. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-022-03038-0.
[22]
QIU J, DENG K, WANG P, et al. Application of diffusion kurtosis imaging to the study of edema in solid and peritumoral areas of glioma[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2022, 86(2): 10-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2021.11.001.
[23]
GAO A, ZHANG H, YAN X, et al. Whole-tumor histogram analysis of multiple diffusion metrics for glioma genotyping[J]. Radiology, 2022, 302(3): 652-661. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.210820.
[24]
KEIJZER H M, DUERING M, PASTERNAK O, et al. Free water corrected diffusion tensor imaging discriminates between good and poor outcomes of comatose patients after cardiac arrest[J]. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(3): 2139-2148. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-09245-w.
[25]
JING X Z, LI G Y, WU Y P, et al. Free water MRI of white matter in Wilson's disease[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2025, 61(5): 2323-2335. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.29657.
[26]
ZENG S, MA H, XIE D, et al. Tumor multiregional mean apparent propagator (MAP) features in evaluating gliomas-A comparative study with diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI)[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2024, 60(4):1532-1546. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.29202.
[27]
WANG P, HE J, MA X, et al. Applying MAP-MRI to identify the WHO grade and main genetic features of adult-type diffuse gliomas: A comparison of three diffusion-weighted MRI models[J]. Acad Radiol, 2023, 30(7): 1238-1246. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.10.009.
[28]
ZHU Y, WANG J, XUE C, et al. Deep learning and habitat radiomics for the prediction of glioma pathology using multiparametric MRI: A multicenter study[J]. Acad Radiol, 2025, 32(2): 963-975. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2024.09.021.
[29]
AHMADZADEH A M, LORMER N B, ASHOOBI M A, et al. Predicting 1p/19q codeletion status in glioma using MRI-Derived radiomics: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2025, 46(10): 2098-2106. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A8771.
[30]
WANG P, XIE S, WU Q, et al. Model incorporating multiple diffusion MRI features: development and validation of a radiomics-based model to predict adult-type diffuse gliomas grade[J]. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(12):8809-8820. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09861-0.

上一篇 基于结构协变因果网络的阿尔茨海默病灰质萎缩机制研究
下一篇 基于心脏磁共振探析肥胖患者心外膜脂肪对左心室纤维化的预测价值
  
诚聘英才 | 广告合作 | 免责声明 | 版权声明
联系电话:010-67113815
京ICP备19028836号-2