Early volumetric, perfusion, and diffusion MRI changes after mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) inhibitor treatment in IDH1-mutant gliomas

IDH inhibition in gliomas: from preclinical models to clinical trials

Gliomas are the most common malignant primary brain tumours in adults and cannot usually be cured with standard cancer treatments. Gliomas show intratumoural and intertumoural heterogeneity at the histological and molecular levels, and they frequently contain mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) or IDH2 gene. IDH-mutant adult-type diffuse gliomas are subdivided into grade 2, 3 or 4 IDH-mutant astrocytomas and grade 2 or 3 IDH-mutant, 1p19q-codeleted oligodendrogliomas. The product of the mutated IDH genes, D-2-hydroxyglutarate (D-2-HG), induces global DNA hypermethylation and interferes with immunity, leading to stimulation of tumour growth. Selective inhibitors of mutant IDH, such as ivosidenib and vorasidenib, have been shown to reduce D-2-HG levels and induce cellular differentiation in preclinical models and to induce MRI-detectable responses in early clinical trials. The phase III INDIGO trial has demonstrated superiority of vorasidenib, a brain-penetrant pan-mutant IDH inhibitor, over placebo in people with non-enhancing grade 2 IDH-mutant gliomas following surgery. In this Review, we describe the pathway of development of IDH inhibitors in IDH-mutant low-grade gliomas from preclinical models to clinical trials. We discuss the practice-changing implications of the INDIGO trial and consider new avenues of investigation in the field of IDH-mutant gliomas.

Standardized brain tumor imaging protocols for clinical trials: current recommendations and tips for integration

Standardized MRI acquisition protocols are crucial for reducing the measurement and interpretation variability associated with response assessment in brain tumor clinical trials. The main challenge is that standardized protocols should ensure high image quality while maximizing the number of institutions meeting the acquisition requirements. In recent years, extensive effort has been made by consensus groups to propose different "ideal" and "minimum requirements" brain tumor imaging protocols (BTIPs) for gliomas, brain metastases (BM), and primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCSNL). In clinical practice, BTIPs for clinical trials can be easily integrated with additional MRI sequences that may be desired for clinical patient management at individual sites. In this review, we summarize the general concepts behind the choice and timing of sequences included in the current recommended BTIPs, we provide a comparative overview, and discuss tips and caveats to integrate additional clinical or research sequences while preserving the recommended BTIPs. Finally, we also reflect on potential future directions for brain tumor imaging in clinical trials.

A multi-reader comparison of normal-appearing white matter normalization techniques for perfusion and diffusion MRI in brain tumors

PURPOSE

There remains no consensus normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) normalization method to compute normalized relative cerebral blood volume (nrCBV) and apparent diffusion coefficient (nADC) in brain tumors. This reader study explored nrCBV and nADC differences using different NAWM normalization methods.

METHODS

Thirty-five newly diagnosed glioma patients were studied. For each patient, two readers created four NAWM regions of interests: (1) a single plane in the centrum semiovale (CSOp), (2) 3 spheres in the centrum semiovale (CSOs), (3) a single plane in the slice of the tumor center (TUMp), and (4) 3 spheres in the slice of the tumor center (TUMs). Readers repeated NAWM segmentations 1 month later. Differences in nrCBV and nADC of the FLAIR hyperintense tumor, inter-/intra-reader variability, and time to segment NAWM were assessed. As a validation step, the diagnostic performance of each method for IDH-status prediction was evaluated.

RESULTS

Both readers obtained significantly different nrCBV (P < .001), nADC (P < .001), and time to segment NAWM (P < .001) between the four normalization methods. nrCBV and nADC were significantly different between CSO and TUM methods, but not between planar and spherical methods in the same NAWM region. Broadly, CSO methods were quicker than TUM methods, and spherical methods were quicker than planar methods. For all normalization techniques, inter-reader reproducibility and intra-reader repeatability were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.9), and the IDH-status predictive performance remained similar.

CONCLUSION

The selected NAWM region significantly impacts nrCBV and nADC values. CSO methods, particularly CSOs, may be preferred because of time reduction, similar reader variability, and similar diagnostic performance compared to TUM methods.