Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

IDH mutation is paradoxically associated with higher 18F-FDOPA PET uptake in diffuse grade II and grade III gliomas

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System has recently been updated by the integration of diagnostic and prognostic molecular parameters, giving pivotal attention to IDH mutation as a favourable factor. Amino acid PET is increasingly used in the management of gliomas, but its prognostic value is a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between IDH mutation and 18F-FDOPA uptake on PET in newly diagnosed gliomas.

Methods

A total of 43 patients, presenting with diffuse astrocytic and oligodendroglial grade II and III gliomas, reclassified according to the 2016 WHO classification of tumours of the CNS, were retrospectively included. They had all undergone 18F-FDOPA PET at an initial stage before surgery and histological diagnosis. 18F-FDOPA uptake values were compared between patients with and without IDH mutation in terms of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) ratios between tumour and normal contralateral brain (T/N), and between tumour and striatum (T/S).

Results

Patients with IDH mutation showed higher 18F-FDOPA T/N SUVmax ratios (1.6 vs. 1.2) and T/S SUVmax ratios (0.9 vs. 0.6) than patients without IDH mutation (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

This study showed paradoxically higher 18F-FDOPA uptake in diffuse grade II and III gliomas with IDH mutation. Despite evident interest in the management of gliomas, and especially in relation to posttherapy evaluation, our findings raise the question of the prognostic value of 18F-FDOPA uptake on PET uptake in this group of patients. This may be related to differences in amino acid integration, metabolism, or cell differentiation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albert NL, Weller M, Suchorska B, Galldiks N, Soffietti R, Kim MM, et al. Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group and European Association for Neuro-Oncology recommendations for the clinical use of PET imaging in gliomas. Neuro Oncol. 2016;18:1199–1208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Figarella-Branger D, Cavenee WK, et al. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol (Berl). 2016;131:803–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Colavolpe C, Metellus P, Mancini J, Barrie M, Béquet-Boucard C, Figarella-Branger D, et al. Independent prognostic value of pre-treatment 18-FDG-PET in high-grade gliomas. J Neurooncol. 2012;107:527–535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Janvier L, Olivier P, Blonski M, Morel O, Vignaud J-M, Karcher G, et al. Correlation of SUV-derived indices with tumoral aggressiveness of gliomas in static 18F-FDOPA PET: use in clinical practice. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40:e429–e435.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Juhász C, Dwivedi S, Kamson DO, Michelhaugh SK, Mittal S. Comparison of amino acid positron emission tomographic radiotracers for molecular imaging of primary and metastatic brain tumors. Mol Imaging. 2014. doi:10.2310/7290.2014.00015.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Villani V, Carapella CM, Chiaravalloti A, Terrenato I, Piludu F, Vidiri A, et al. The role of PET [18F]FDOPA in evaluating low-grade glioma. Anticancer Res. 2015;35:5117–5122.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rossi Espagnet MC, Romano A, Mancuso V, Cicone F, Napolitano A, Scaringi C, et al. Multiparametric evaluation of low grade gliomas at follow-up: comparison between diffusion and perfusion MR with (18)F-FDOPA PET. Br J Radiol. 2016;89:20160476.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cheng W, Ren X, Zhang C, Cai J, Han S, Wu A. Gene expression profiling stratifies IDH1-mutant glioma with distinct prognoses. Mol Neurobiol. 2016. doi:10.1007/s12035-016-0150-6.

  9. Zeng A, Hu Q, Liu Y, Wang Z, Cui X, Li R, et al. IDH1/2 mutation status combined with Ki-67 labeling index defines distinct prognostic groups in glioma. Oncotarget. 2015;6:30232–30238.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK, Burger PC, Jouvet A, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol (Berl). 2007;114:97–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen W, Silverman DHS, Delaloye S, Czernin J, Kamdar N, Pope W, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with 18F-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:904–911.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fueger BJ, Czernin J, Cloughesy T, Silverman DH, Geist CL, Walter MA, et al. Correlation of 6-18F-fluoro-L-dopa PET uptake with proliferation and tumor grade in newly diagnosed and recurrent gliomas. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1532–1538.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Metellus P, Colin C, Taieb D, Guedj E, Nanni-Metellus I, de Paula AM, et al. IDH mutation status impact on in vivo hypoxia biomarkers expression: new insights from a clinical, nuclear imaging and immunohistochemical study in 33 glioma patients. J Neurooncol. 2011;105:591–600.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hines WG, Hines RJ. Increased power with modified forms of the Levene (Med) test for heterogeneity of variance. Biometrics. 2000;56:451–454.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tabouret E, Nguyen AT, Dehais C, Carpentier C, Ducray F, Idbaih A, et al. Prognostic impact of the 2016 WHO classification of diffuse gliomas in the French POLA cohort. Acta Neuropathol (Berl). 2016;132:625–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Reitman ZJ, Jin G, Karoly ED, Spasojevic I, Yang J, Kinzler KW, et al. Profiling the effects of isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations on the cellular metabolome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108:3270–3275.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Grassian AR, Parker SJ, Davidson SM, Divakaruni AS, Green CR, Zhang X, et al. IDH1 mutations alter citric acid cycle metabolism and increase dependence on oxidative mitochondrial metabolism. Cancer Res. 2014;74:3317–3331.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Jacob T, Grahek D, Younsi N, Kerrou K, Aide N, Montravers F, et al. Positron emission tomography with [(18)F]FDOPA and [(18)F]FDG in the imaging of small cell lung carcinoma: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:1266–1269.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bette S, Gempt J, Delbridge C, Kirschke JS, Schlegel J, Foerster S, et al. Prognostic value of O-(2-[18F]-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine-positron emission tomography imaging for histopathologic characteristics and progression-free survival in patients with low-grade glioma. World Neurosurg. 2016;89:230–239.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V, Eigenbrod S, Schmid-Tannwald C, Zwergal A, et al. Dynamic 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed astrocytic low-grade glioma identifies high-risk patients. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:198–203.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wiestler B, Capper D, Holland-Letz T, Korshunov A, von Deimling A, Pfister SM, et al. ATRX loss refines the classification of anaplastic gliomas and identifies a subgroup of IDH mutant astrocytic tumors with better prognosis. Acta Neuropathol (Berl). 2013;126:443–451.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Labussière M, Idbaih A, Wang X-W, Marie Y, Boisselier B, Falet C, et al. All the 1p19q codeleted gliomas are mutated on IDH1 or IDH2. Neurology. 2010;74:1886–1890.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Darcourt J, Schiazza A, Sapin N, Dufour M, Ouvrier MJ, Benisvy D, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET for the diagnosis of parkinsonian syndromes. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;58:355–365.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, APHM, La Timone Hospital, Marseille, France

    A. Verger, Q. Sala, D. Taieb & E. Guedj

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine & Nancyclotep Imaging Platform, CHRU Nancy, Lorraine University, Nancy, France

    A. Verger

  3. IADI, INSERM, UMR 947, Lorraine University, Nancy, France

    A. Verger

  4. Department of Neurosurgery, Centre Hospitalier Privé Clairval, Marseille, France

    Ph. Metellus & E. Bialecki

  5. INSERM, UMR 911, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France

    Ph. Metellus, C. Colin, O. Chinot & D. Figarella-Branger

  6. CERIMED, Aix-Marseille University , Marseille, France

    D. Taieb & E. Guedj

  7. Department of Neuro-Oncology, APHM, La Timone Hospital, Marseille, France

    O. Chinot

  8. Department of Anatomopathology, APHM, La Timone Hospital, Marseille, France

    D. Figarella-Branger

  9. Institut de Neurosciences de la Timone, CNRS, UMR 7289, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France

    E. Guedj

  10. Service Central de Biophysique et Médecine Nucléaire, Hôpital de la Timone, 264 rue Saint Pierre, 13005, Marseille, France

    E. Guedj

Authors
  1. A. Verger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ph. Metellus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Q. Sala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Colin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. Bialecki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. D. Taieb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. O. Chinot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. D. Figarella-Branger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. E. Guedj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. Guedj.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This work was carried out in the framework of DHU-Imaging with the support of the A*MIDEX project (no. ANR-11-IDEX-0001-02) funded by the “Investissements d’Avenir” French Government programme, managed by the French National Research Agency (ANR), and an INCa-DGOS-Inserm 6038 grant (SIRIC Marseille Glioma program).

Conflicts of interest

None.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Tumour specimens were retrieved from the AP-HM tissue bank AC 2013-1786.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Verger, A., Metellus, P., Sala, Q. et al. IDH mutation is paradoxically associated with higher 18F-FDOPA PET uptake in diffuse grade II and grade III gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44, 1306–1311 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3668-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3668-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation