Prakash Ambady

Background MRI with gadolinium (Gd)-contrast agents is used to assess glioblastoma treatment response but does not specifically reveal heterogeneous biology or immune microenvironmental composition. Ferumoxytol (Fe) contrast is an iron nanoparticle that localizes glioblastoma macrophages and microglia. Therefore, we hypothesized that the use of Fe contrast improves upon standard Gd-based T1-weighted and T2/FLAIR analysis by specifically delineating immune processes. Methods In this, HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved prospective study, stereotactic biopsy samples were acquired from patients with treatment-naïve and recurrent glioblastoma based on MR imaging phenotypes; Gd and Fe T1 enhancement (Gd+, Fe+) or not (Gd–, Fe–), as well as T2-Flair hyperintensity (FLAIR+, FLAIR–). Analysis of genetic expression was performed with RNA microarrays. Imaging and genomic expression patterns were compared using false discovery rate statistics. Results MR imaging phenotypes defined a variety of immune pathways and Hallmark gene sets. Gene set enrichment analysis demonstrated that Gd+, Fe+, and FLAIR+ features were individually correlated with the same 7 immune process gene sets. Fe+ tissue showed the greatest degree of immune Hallmark gene sets compared to Gd+ or Flair+ tissues and had statistically elevated M2 polarized macrophages, among others. Importantly, the FLAIR+ Gd+ and Fe– imaging phenotypes did not demonstrate expression of immune Hallmark gene sets. Conclusions Our study demonstrates the potential of Fe and Gd-enhanced MRI phenotypes to reveal spatially distinct immune processes within glioblastoma. Fe improves upon the standard of care Gd enhancement by specifically localizing glioblastoma-associated inflammatory processes, providing valuable insights into tumor biology.

Background Intra-arterial administration of chemotherapy with or without osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption enhances delivery of therapeutic agents to brain tumors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety of these procedures. Methods Retrospectively collected data from a prospective database of consecutive patients with primary and metastatic brain tumors who received intra-arterial chemotherapy without osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption (IA) or intra-arterial chemotherapy with osmotic blood–brain barrier disruption (IA/OBBBD) at Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) between December 1997 and November 2018 is reported. Chemotherapy-related complications are detailed per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) guidelines. Procedure-related complications are grouped as major and minor. Results 4939 procedures (1102 IA; 3837 IA/OBBBD) were performed on 436 patients with various pathologies (primary central nervous system lymphoma [26.4%], glioblastoma [18.1%], and oligodendroglioma [14.7%]). Major procedure-related complications (IA: 12, 1%; IA/OBBBD: 27, 0.7%; P = .292) occurred in 39 procedures including 3 arterial dissections requiring intervention, 21 symptomatic strokes, 3 myocardial infarctions, 6 cervical cord injuries, and 6 deaths within 3 days. Minor procedure-related complications occurred in 330 procedures (IA: 41, 3.7%; IA/OBBBD: 289, 7.5%; P = .001). Chemotherapy-related complications with a CTCAE attribution and grade higher than 3 was seen in 359 (82.3%) patients. Conclusions We provide safety and tolerability data from the largest cohort of consecutive patients who received IA or IA/OBBBD. Our data demonstrate that IA or IA/OBBBD safely enhance drug delivery to brain tumors and brain around the tumor.