Back

Differentiating radiation necrosis from recurrent brain metastases using magnetic resonance elastography

Aunan-Diop, J. S.; Friismose, A. I.; Yin, Z.; Hojo, E.; Krogh Pettersen, J.; Hjortdal Gronhoj, M.; Bonde Pedersen, C.; Mussmann, B.; Halle, B.; Poulsen, F. R.

2026-03-06 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.03.04.26347674 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundConventional MRI cannot reliably distinguish radiation necrosis (RN) from recurrent metastasis after cranial radiotherapy, as both can show similar enhancement despite different biology. We tested whether these entities are mechanically non-equivalent in vivo and separable by MRE-derived viscoelastic metrics and perilesional interface-instability features. MethodsIn a prospective, histopathology-anchored cohort, 11 post-radiotherapy enhancing lesions were classified as RN (n=3) or recurrent/progressive tumor (n=8). MRE was acquired at 3.0 T with single-frequency 60-Hz excitation to derive storage modulus (G'), loss modulus (G''), and complex shear modulus magnitude (|G*|). Co-primary endpoints were median tumor G' and |G*|, each tested one-sided (RN > tumor) with Holm correction across the two co-primary tests. Median tumor G'' was tested two-sided. A prespecified secondary 6-endpoint family (absolute and tumor/NAWM-normalized G', G'', and |G*|) was analyzed with Benjamini-Hochberg FDR control. Exploratory instability mapping in a 0-6 mm peritumoral shell generated interface-topology metrics, including convexity. ResultsAbsolute tumor-core medians were higher in RN than tumor for |G*| (1.79 vs 1.32 kPa; Cliffs {delta}=0.67; q=0.10), G' (1.62 vs 1.09 kPa; {delta}=0.50; q=0.14), and G'' (0.81 vs 0.46 kPa; {delta}=0.75; q=0.10). NAWM normalization improved separation: tumor/NAWM |G*| (2.26 vs 1.41; {delta}=0.92; q=0.04) and tumor/NAWM G'' (2.67 vs 0.87; {delta}=1.00; q=0.04) were FDR-significant. Convexity also differentiated RN from tumor (0.49 vs 0.36; {delta}=1.00; MWU p=0.01). ConclusionsTumor/NAWM G'', tumor/NAWM |G*|, convexity, and tumor G'' emerged as the strongest candidate features, indicating that RN is mechanically harder and more dissipative than recurrent metastasis. Signal strength was high (Cliffs {delta} up to 1.00) but should be interpreted cautiously given sample size. Exploratory analyses further suggest that instability mapping captures biologically relevant interface behavior. These findings support a mechanics-based RN-versus-recurrence framework and justify prespecified, preregistered external validation.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
23.2%
2
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
3
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.4%
5
Radiotherapy and Oncology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
6
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.1%
7
Biomaterials Advances
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
50% of probability mass above
8
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
9
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
10
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
11
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
12
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
15
Journal of Neurotrauma
27 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.7%
17
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
18
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
19
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
20
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
21
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
22
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
23
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
24
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
25
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
26
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
27
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
28
Theranostics
33 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
29
Cells
232 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
30
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%