Table 2.
Confounders of resectability
Volume epMRI | Volume follow-up MRI | EOR epMRI | EOR follow-up MRI | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spearman rho | p value | Spearman rho | p value | Spearman rho | p value | Spearman rho | p value | |
Continuous variables | ||||||||
Age | 0.162 | 0.367 | 0.264 | 0.087 | −0.184 | 0.314 | −0.338 | 0.031 |
Volume preoperative | 0.845 | <0.0001 | 0.818 | <0.0001 | −0.338 | 0.063 | −0.572 | <0.001 |
dT2T1 preoperative | 0.269 | 0.143 | 0.159 | 0.334 | −0.008 | 0.966 | −0.057 | 0.731 |
Binary variables | ||||||||
KPS preoperative | 0.870 | 0.683 | 0.917 | 0.700 | ||||
Incidental finding | 0.024 | 0.001 | 0.555 | 0.019 | ||||
Tumor eloquence | 0.940 | 0.659 | 0.917 | 0.642 | ||||
IDH1 mutation | 0.314 | 0.208 | 0.397 | 0.577 | ||||
iMRI surgery | 0.013 | 0.008 | 0.0318 | 0.001 |
Analysis of confounders of resectability. Association of continuous variables was assessed by spearman correlation analysis, binary variables were analyzed with Mann–Whitney tests. Significant values are presented in bold face
EOR extent of resection, dT2T1 difference in tumor volume expansion on preoperative T2 and T1 sequences, iMRI intraoperative MRI, KPS Karnofsky Performance Scale