Ana-Cristina Istrate

Dr. Ana-Cristina Istrate


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

2Years (2025-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 September 2025 in Diagnostics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DPDaniela Pomohaci
Daniela Pomohaci
EMEmilia Marciuc
Emilia Marciuc
BDBogdan Dobrovat
Bogdan Dobrovat
MPMihaela Roxana Popescu
Mihaela Roxana Popescu
AIAna-Cristina Istrate
Ana-Cristina Istrate
DHDANISIA Haba
DANISIA Haba
Background/Objectives: Glioblastomas (GBMs) and brain metastases (BMs) are both frequent brain lesions. Distinguishing between them is crucial for suitable therapeutic and follow-up decisions, but this distinction is difficult to achieve, as it includes clinical, radiological and histopathological correlation. However, non-invasive AI examination of conventional and advanced MRI techniques can overcome this issue. Methods: We retrospectively selected 78 patients with confirmed GBM (39) and single BM (39), with conventional MRI investigations, consisting of T2W FLAIR and CE T1W acquisitions. The MRI images (DICOM) were evaluated by an AI segmentation tool, comparatively evaluating tumor heterogeneity and peripheral edema. Results: We found that GBMs are less edematous than BMs (p = 0.04) but have more internal necrosis (p = 0.002). Of the BM primary cancer molecular subtypes, NSCCL showed the highest grade of edema (p = 0.01). Compared with the ellipsoidal method of volume calculation, the AI machine obtained greater values when measuring lesions of the occipital and temporal lobes (p = 0.01). Conclusions: Although extremely useful in radiomics analysis, automated segmentation applied alone could effectively differentiate GBM and BM on a conventional MRI, calculating the ratio between their variable components (solid, necrotic and peripheral edema). Other studies applied to a broader set of participants are necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of automated segmentation.

8 August 2025 in Preprints.org
Verified
Preprint
Open access
PDF file
DPDaniela Pomohaci
Daniela Pomohaci
EMEmilia Marciuc
Emilia Marciuc
BDBogdan Dobrovat
Bogdan Dobrovat
MPMihaela Roxana Popescu
Mihaela Roxana Popescu
AIAna-Cristina Istrate
Ana-Cristina Istrate
DHDANISIA Haba
DANISIA Haba
Background/Objectives: Glioblastoma (GBM) and brain metastases (BMs) are both frequent brain lesions. Their distinction is crucial for suitable therapeutic and follow-up decisions, but difficult to achieve, as it includes clinical, radiological and histopathological correlation. However, non-invasive AI examination of conventional and advanced MRI techniques can overcome this issue. Methods: We retrospectively selected 78 patients with confirmed GBM (39) and single BM (39), with conventional MRI investigations, consisting of T2W FLAIR and CE T1W acquisitions. The MRI images (DICOM) have been evaluated by an AI segmentation tool, comparatively evaluating the tumor heterogeneity and peripheric edema. Results: We found that GBM are less edematous than BM (p=0.04), but have more internal necrosis (p=0.002). Of the BM primary cancer molecular subtypes, NSCCL showed the higher grade of edema (p=0.01). Compared to the ellipsoidal method of volume calculation, the AI machine obtained greater values in measuring lesions of the occipital and temporal lobes (p=0.01). Conclusions: Although extremely useful in radiomics analysis, automated segmentation applied alone could effectively differentiate GBM and BM on conventional MRI, calculating the ratio between their variable components (solid, necrotic and peripheric edema). Other studies applied to a broader set of participants are necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of automated segmentation.