Cerebral metastases: do size, peritumoral edema, or multiplicity predict infiltration into brain parenchyma?
- 15 Downloads
Brain metastases (BMs) are the most frequent malignancy of the central nervous system. Previous research suggested that some metastases show infiltrative behavior rather than sharp demarcation. We hypothesized that three magnetic resonance (MR) imaging parameters—(a) tumor size, (b) extent of peritumoral edema, and (c) presence of multiple BMs—are predictors of cellular invasion beyond the surgically identifiable tumor margins.
We performed a post hoc analysis on prospectively collected data of patients with BMs. Biopsies beyond the resection margin and immunohistochemistry were performed to assess infiltration status. The three MR imaging parameters were dichotomized into diameters ≤ 30 mm (“small”) and > 30 mm (“large”), amount of peritumoral edema “extended” and “limited,” and “multiple BMs” and “single BMs,” respectively. The association between infiltration status and imaging parameters was calculated using chi-square test.
Biopsy beyond the resection margin was performed in 77 patients; 49 (63.6%) had supramarginal infiltration and 28 patients (36.4%) showed no infiltration. Histological evidence of tumor infiltration was found in 25/41 patients with smaller lesions (61%) and in 24/36 with larger lesions (66.7%, p = 0.64), in 28/44 patients with limited (63.6%) and in 21/33 patients with extended edema (63.6%, p = 1.0), in 28/45 patients (62.2%) with single BM and in 21/32 patients (65.6%) with multiple BMs (p = 0.81).
Based on the post hoc analysis of our prospective trial data, we could not confirm the hypothesis that infiltration of brain parenchyma beyond the glial pseudocapsule is associated with the MR imaging parameters tumor size, extent of edema, or multiplicity of metastases.
KeywordsBrain metastases Peritumoral edema Multiple brain metastases Supramarginal infiltration
The authors are grateful for the contributions of Prof. Florian Stockhammer, Dr. Laila Siam, and Daniela Egert to the present study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
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 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Aiello M, Cavaliere C, Fiorenza D, Duggento A, Passamonti L, Toschi N (2018) Neuroinflammation in neurodegenerative diseases: current multi-modal imaging studies and future opportunities for hybrid PET/MRI. Neuroscience S0306–4522(18):30508–30516Google Scholar
- 2.Aminoff A, Josephson A (2014) Aminoff’s neurology and general medicine. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 8.Ceccon G, Lohmann P, Stoffels G, Judov N, Filss CP, Rapp M, Bauer E, Hamisch C, Ruge MI, Kocher M, Kuchelmeister K, Sellhaus B, Sabel M, Fink GR, Shah NJ, Langen KJ, Galldiks N (2017) Dynamic O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography differentiates brain metastasis recurrence from radiation injury after radiotherapy. Neuro-Oncology 19(2):281–288PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.DeAngelis LM, Currie VE, Kim JH, Krol G, O’Hehir MA, Farag FM, Young CW, Posner JM (1989) The combined use of radiation therapy and lonidamine in the treatment of brain metastases. J Neurol 7:241–247Google Scholar
- 23.Krüger S, Mottaghy FM, Buck AK et al (2011) Brain metastasis in lung cancer. Comparison of cerebral MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT for diagnosis in the initial staging. Nucl Med (Stuttg) 50:101–106Google Scholar
- 28.Paek SH, Audu PB, Sperling MR, Cho J, Andrews DW (2005) Reevaluation of surgery for the treatment of brain metastases: review of 208 patients with single or multiple brain metastases treated at one institution with modern neurosurgical techniques. Neurosurgery 56:1021–1034 discussion 1021–1034PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Patel AJ, Lang FF, Suki D, Wildrick DM, Sawaya R (2017) Metastatic brain tumors. In: Youmans and Winn (ed) Neurologic surgery, 7th edn. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 1091–1106Google Scholar
- 35.Runge VM (1997) Contrast-enhanced clinical magnetic resonance imaging. The University Press of Kentucky, LexingtonGoogle Scholar
- 39.Spanberger T, Berghoff AS, Dinhof C, Ilhan-Mutlu A, Magerle M, Hutterer M, Pichler J, Wöhrer A, Hackl M, Widhalm G, Hainfellner JA, Dieckmann K, Marosi C, Birner P, Prayer D, Preusser M (2013) Extent of peritumoral brain edema correlates with prognosis, tumoral growth pattern, HIF1a expression and angiogenic activity in patients with single brain metastases. Clin Exp Metastasis 30(4):357–368CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 41.Sundaresan N (2007) Surgical treatment of brain metastases. Proc 13th Eur Congr Neurosurg pp 63–71Google Scholar