Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29126125›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2018

Highly specific determination of IDH status using edited in vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Francesca Branzoli, Anna Luisa Di Stefano, Laurent Capelle, Chris Ottolenghi, Romain Valabrègue, Dinesh K Deelchand, Franck Bielle, Chiara Villa, Bertrand Baussart, Stéphane Lehéricy and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. IDH mutant high-grade gliomas.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Francesca BranzoliCentre de NeuroImagerie de Recherche, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinère, Paris, France.
Anna Luisa Di StefanoAP-HP, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service de Neurologie, Paris, France; Department of Neurology, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, Paris, France.
Laurent CapelleAP-HP, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service de Neurochirurgie, Paris, France.
Chris OttolenghiCentre de Référence des Maladies Métaboliques, Service de Biochimie Métabolique, Hôpital Necker and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.
Romain ValabrègueCentre de NeuroImagerie de Recherche, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinère, Paris, France.
Dinesh K DeelchandCenter for Magnetic Resonance Research and Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Franck BielleAP-HP, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, Laboratoire R Escourolle, Paris, France; Department of Pathological Cytology and Anatomy, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, Paris, France.
Chiara Villa
Bertrand BaussartDepartment of Neurosurgery, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, Paris, France.
Stéphane LehéricyCentre de NeuroImagerie de Recherche, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinère, Paris, France.
Marc SansonSorbonne Universités, UPMC University of Paris, Paris, France.
Malgorzata MarjanskaCenter for Magnetic Resonance Research and Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRSorbonne Université · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FRUniversity of Minnesota · USHôpital Foch · FRInstitut du Cerveau · FRPitié-Salpêtrière Hospital · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) enzyme affect 40% of gliomas and represent a major diagnostic and prognostic marker. The goals of this study were to evaluate the performance of noninvasive magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) methods to determine the IDH status of patients with brain gliomas through detection of the oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate (2HG) and to compare performance of these methods with DNA sequencing and tissue 2HG analysis. Methods: Twenty-four subjects with suspected diagnosis of low-grade glioma were included prospectively in the study. For all subjects, MRS data were acquired at 3T using 2 MRS methods, edited MRS using Mescher-Garwood point-resolved spectroscopy (MEGA-PRESS) sequence and a PRESS sequence optimized for 2HG detection, using a volume of interest larger than 6 mL. IDH mutational status was determined by a combination of automated immunohistochemical analysis and Sanger sequencing. Levels of 2HG in tissue samples measured by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry were compared with those estimated by MRS. Results: Edited MRS provided 100% specificity and 100% sensitivity in the detection of 2HG. The 2HG levels estimated by this technique were in line with those derived from tissue samples. Optimized PRESS provided lower performance, in agreement with previous findings. Conclusions: Our results suggest that edited MRS is one of the most reliable tools to predict IDH mutation noninvasively, showing high sensitivity and specificity for 2HG detection. Integrating edited MRS in clinical practice may be highly beneficial for noninvasive diagnosis of glioma, prognostic assessment, and treatment planning.

Indexed as

MutationAdultBiomarkers, TumorBrain NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGliomaHumansIsocitrate DehydrogenaseMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesYoung AdultBiomarkers, TumorIDH1 protein, humanIDH2 protein, humanIsocitrate Dehydrogenase

Identifiers

PMID29126125
PMCPMC6007442
OpenAlexW2767579193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.