
95% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Neurol.
Sec. Applied Neuroimaging
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1543619
This article is part of the Research Topic Diffusion-Weighted Imaging: Advances and Implementations in Neurology View all 6 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Although diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI), particularly diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), has demonstrated efficacy in distinguishing between low-and high-grade gliomas, its predictive utility across various molecular genotypes remains unclear. Evaluating the accuracy of DKI and identifying sources of heterogeneity in its predictive performance could advance noninvasive molecular diagnostic methods and support the development of personalized treatment strategies.Materials and Methods: A literature search of the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline databases was performed. The studies retrieved were screened by two researchers (HFZ and ZGH), and those fulfilling the inclusion criteria were subsequently included in the meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. The analyses summarized the mean differences in mean kurtosis (MK) and mean diffusivity (MD) in patients harboring various genotypes using suitable models, and explored heterogeneity. Finally, a bivariate restricted maximum likelihood estimation method and meta-regression analysis were performed to assess diagnostic potential and stability.Results: Fourteen studies comprising 886 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Regarding MK and MD, the mean difference between isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation and IDH wild type was -0.21 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.27 to -0.15; I 2 = 93%) and 0.22 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.33; I 2 = 92%), respectively. This heterogeneity could be explained by imaging parameters such as repetition time, echo time, maximal b-value, and number of diffusion directions.However, the mean difference did not reflect the genetic status of 1p/19q, α-thalassemia/mental retardation syndrome-X-linked (ATRX) gene, or O6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT). Analysis of diagnostic accuracy revealed that the pooled areas under the curve for MK and MD, based on IDH status, were 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.81), respectively.Heterogeneity was not observed for these DKI parameters.Conclusion: MK and MD exhibited potential diagnostic utility in the prediction of glioma molecular status and should be explored in medical practice. These parameters should be compared with other MRI models to develop a stable and suitable genetic molecular prediction method for patients with gliomas.
Keywords: glioma genotype, Molecular diagnosis, DKI, Diagnostic accuracy, Meta-analysis
Received: 11 Dec 2024; Accepted: 07 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Zhao, Hou, He, Liu and Xie. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Jian Xie, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.