Efficiency of Dexamethasone for Treatment of Vasogenic Edema in Brain Metastasis Patients: A Radiographic Approach
Standard
Efficiency of Dexamethasone for Treatment of Vasogenic Edema in Brain Metastasis Patients: A Radiographic Approach. / Schroeder, Tanja; Bittrich, Paul; Noebel, Clara; Kuhne, Jan Felix; Schroeder, Julian; Schoen, Gerhard; Fiehler, Jens; Kniep, Helge C; Gellißen, Susanne.
In: FRONT ONCOL, Vol. 9, 2019, p. 695.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Efficiency of Dexamethasone for Treatment of Vasogenic Edema in Brain Metastasis Patients: A Radiographic Approach
AU - Schroeder, Tanja
AU - Bittrich, Paul
AU - Noebel, Clara
AU - Kuhne, Jan Felix
AU - Schroeder, Julian
AU - Schoen, Gerhard
AU - Fiehler, Jens
AU - Kniep, Helge C
AU - Gellißen, Susanne
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Background and Purpose: To date, imaging studies quantifying the amount of vasogenic edema reduction (VE) in patients with brain metastases (BM) treated with glucocorticoids (GC) have included a very limited number of patients and showed ambiguous results. Here, we aim to determine the radiological effect of GC on VE in BM patients in a large cohort with multiple primary tumor entities in a cross-sectional approach. Materials and Methods: This monocentric retrospective study includes 299 patients first-ever diagnosed with 2,759 intra-axial BM on the respective MRI. 126/299 patients received GC prior to MRI due to mass effect of edema on cranial CT scan and clinical symptoms (GC-pos) and 173 patients did not (GC-neg). GC dose was documented in 85/126 patients. All BM and their respective VE were semi-automatically segmented on post-contrast T1-weighted images. Results: VE volumes were higher in GC-pos compared to GC-neg (p = 0.009) and did not correlate with GC dose. Multivariate linear regression analysis with interaction terms on the assumption that BM volume and BM number influence the probability of GC administration shows that large and higher numbers of BM under GC treatment generate less VE than without (p < 0.001 and p = 0.038, respectively). The primary tumor type and total BM volume did not influence VE volume. Conclusion: Use of GC is especially effective for treatment of VE formation in patients with larger and multiple BM regardless of primary tumor type and dosage. However, based on the present data a direct causative relationship between GC and VE cannot be proven.
AB - Background and Purpose: To date, imaging studies quantifying the amount of vasogenic edema reduction (VE) in patients with brain metastases (BM) treated with glucocorticoids (GC) have included a very limited number of patients and showed ambiguous results. Here, we aim to determine the radiological effect of GC on VE in BM patients in a large cohort with multiple primary tumor entities in a cross-sectional approach. Materials and Methods: This monocentric retrospective study includes 299 patients first-ever diagnosed with 2,759 intra-axial BM on the respective MRI. 126/299 patients received GC prior to MRI due to mass effect of edema on cranial CT scan and clinical symptoms (GC-pos) and 173 patients did not (GC-neg). GC dose was documented in 85/126 patients. All BM and their respective VE were semi-automatically segmented on post-contrast T1-weighted images. Results: VE volumes were higher in GC-pos compared to GC-neg (p = 0.009) and did not correlate with GC dose. Multivariate linear regression analysis with interaction terms on the assumption that BM volume and BM number influence the probability of GC administration shows that large and higher numbers of BM under GC treatment generate less VE than without (p < 0.001 and p = 0.038, respectively). The primary tumor type and total BM volume did not influence VE volume. Conclusion: Use of GC is especially effective for treatment of VE formation in patients with larger and multiple BM regardless of primary tumor type and dosage. However, based on the present data a direct causative relationship between GC and VE cannot be proven.
U2 - 10.3389/fonc.2019.00695
DO - 10.3389/fonc.2019.00695
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 31417871
VL - 9
SP - 695
JO - FRONT ONCOL
JF - FRONT ONCOL
SN - 2234-943X
ER -