Background: Germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) is becoming more broadly accepted, but testing indications and clinical consequences for carriers in each disease stage are... Show moreBackground: Germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) is becoming more broadly accepted, but testing indications and clinical consequences for carriers in each disease stage are not yet well defined.Objective: To determine the consensus of a Dutch multidisciplinary expert panel on the indication and application of germline and tumour genetic testing in PCa.Design, setting, and participants: The panel consisted of 39 specialists involved in PCa management. We used a modified Delphi method consisting of two voting rounds and a virtual consensus meeting.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was reached if >75% of the panellists chose the same option. Appropriateness was assessed by the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.Results and limitations: Of the multiple-choice questions, 44% reached consensus. For men without PCa having a relevant family history (familial PCa/BRCA-related hered-itary cancer), follow-up by prostate-specific antigen was considered appropriate. For patients with low-risk localised PCa and a family history of PCa, active surveil-lance was considered appropriate, except in case of the patient being a BRCA2 germ -line pathogenic variant carrier. Germline and tumour genetic testing should not be done for nonmetastatic hormone-sensitive PCa in the absence of a relevant family history of cancer. Tumour genetic testing was deemed most appropriate for the identification of actionable variants, with uncertainty for germline testing. For tumour genetic testing in metastatic castration-resistant PCa, consensus was not reached for the timing and panel composition. The principal limitations are as fol-lows: (1) a number of topics discussed lack scientific evidence, and therefore the recommendations are partly opinion based, and (2) there was a small number of experts per discipline.Conclusions: The outcomes of this Dutch consensus meeting may provide further guidance on genetic counselling and molecular testing related to PCa.Patient summary: A group of Dutch specialists discussed the use of germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) patients, indication of these tests (which patients and when), and impact of these tests on the management and treatment of PCa.(c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
Simple Summary Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET/CT imaging is increasingly being used for (re)staging in prostate cancer. Although PSMA suggests specificity to prostate cancer... Show moreSimple Summary Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET/CT imaging is increasingly being used for (re)staging in prostate cancer. Although PSMA suggests specificity to prostate cancer, previous preclinical studies and case reports have shown this protein to be overexpressed by multiple other tumor types. This study aims to investigate the applicability of a PSMA-targeted PET/CT tracer to detect gastrointestinal cancers, including colon, pancreatic and gastric cancer. Current imaging modalities frequently misjudge disease stage in colorectal, gastric and pancreatic cancer. As treatment decisions are dependent on disease stage, incorrect staging has serious consequences. Previous preclinical research and case reports indicate that prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET/CT imaging might provide a solution to some of these challenges. This prospective clinical study aims to assess the feasibility of [F-18]DCFPyL PET/CT imaging to target and visualize primary colon, gastric and pancreatic cancer. In this prospective clinical trial, patients with colon, gastric and pancreatic cancer were included and underwent both [F-18]DCFPyL and [F-18]FDG PET/CT scans prior to surgical resection or (for gastric cancer) neoadjuvant therapy. Semiquantitative analysis of immunohistochemical PSMA staining was performed on the surgical resection specimens, and the results were correlated to imaging parameters. The results of this study demonstrate detection of the primary tumor by [F-18]DCFPyL PET/CT in 7 out of 10 patients with colon, gastric and pancreatic cancer, with a mean tumor-to-blood pool ratio (TBR) of 3.3 and mean SUVmax of 3.6. However, due to the high surrounding uptake, visual distinction of these tumors was difficult, and the SUVmax and TBR on [F-18]FDG PET/CT were significantly higher than on [F-18]DCFPyL PET/CT. In addition, no correlation between PSMA expression in the resection specimen and SUVmax on [F-18]DCFPyL PET/CT was found. In conclusion, the detection of several gastrointestinal cancers using [F-18]DCFPyL PET/CT is feasible. However, low tumor expression and high uptake physiologically in organs/background hamper the clear distinction of the tumor. As a result, [F-18]FDG PET/CT was superior in detecting colon, gastric and pancreatic cancers. Show less
Unterrainer, M.; Deroose, C.M.; Herrmann, K.; Moehler, M.; Blomqvist, L.; Cannella, R.; ... ; European Soc Gastrointestinal Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) 2022
Background: Treatment monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relies on imaging to evaluate the tumour burden. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors provide a framework on... Show moreBackground: Treatment monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) relies on imaging to evaluate the tumour burden. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors provide a framework on reporting and interpretation of imaging findings yet offer no guidance on a standardised imaging protocol tailored to patients with mCRC. Imaging protocol hetero-geneity remains a challenge for the reproducibility of conventional imaging end-points and is an obstacle for research on novel imaging end-points. Patients and methods: Acknowledging the recently highlighted potential of radiomics and arti-ficial intelligence tools as decision support for patient care in mCRC, a multidisciplinary, international and expert panel of imaging specialists was formed to find consensus on mCRC imaging protocols using the Delphi method. Results: Under the guidance of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging and Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer Groups, the European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), the EORTC-ESOI-ESGAR core imaging protocol was identified. Conclusion: This consensus protocol attempts to promote standardisation and to diminish variations in patient preparation, scan acquisition and scan reconstruction. We anticipate that this standardisation will increase reproducibility of radiomics and artificial intelligence studies and serve as a catalyst for future research on imaging end-points. For ongoing and future mCRC trials, we encourage principal investigators to support the dissemination of these im-aging standards across recruiting centres. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
DeSouza, N.M.; Lugt, A. van der; Deroose, C.M.; Alberich-Bayarri, A.; Bidaut, L.; Fournier, L.; ... ; European Org Res Treatment Canc 2022
Background Lesion/tissue segmentation on digital medical images enables biomarker extraction, image-guided therapy delivery, treatment response measurement, and training/validation for developing... Show moreBackground Lesion/tissue segmentation on digital medical images enables biomarker extraction, image-guided therapy delivery, treatment response measurement, and training/validation for developing artificial intelligence algorithms and workflows. To ensure data reproducibility, criteria for standardised segmentation are critical but currently unavailable. Methods A modified Delphi process initiated by the European Imaging Biomarker Alliance (EIBALL) of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group was undertaken. Three multidisciplinary task forces addressed modality and image acquisition, segmentation methodology itself, and standards and logistics. Devised survey questions were fed via a facilitator to expert participants. The 58 respondents to Round 1 were invited to participate in Rounds 2-4. Subsequent rounds were informed by responses of previous rounds. Results/conclusions Items with >= 75% consensus are considered a recommendation. These include system performance certification, thresholds for image signal-to-noise, contrast-to-noise and tumour-to-background ratios, spatial resolution, and artefact levels. Direct, iterative, and machine or deep learning reconstruction methods, use of a mixture of CE marked and verified research tools were agreed and use of specified reference standards and validation processes considered essential. Operator training and refreshment were considered mandatory for clinical trials and clinical research. Items with a 60-74% agreement require reporting (site-specific accreditation for clinical research, minimal pixel number within lesion segmented, use of post-reconstruction algorithms, operator training refreshment for clinical practice). Items with <= 60% agreement are outside current recommendations for segmentation (frequency of system performance tests, use of only CE-marked tools, board certification of operators, frequency of operator refresher training). Recommendations by anatomical area are also specified. Show less
Better biomarkers are needed to predict treatment outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with anti-programmed death1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) checkpoint... Show moreBetter biomarkers are needed to predict treatment outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with anti-programmed death1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors. PD-L1 immunohistochemistry has limited predictive value, possibly because of tumor heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression. Noninvasive PD-L1 imaging using Zr-89-durvalumab might better reflect tumor PD-L1 expression. Methods: NSCLC patients eligible for second-line immunotherapy were enrolled. Patients received 2 injections of Zr-89-durvalumab: one without a preceding dose of unlabeled durvalumab (tracer dose only) and one with a preceding dose of 750 mg of durvalumab, directly before tracer injection. Up to 4 PET/CT scans were obtained after tracer injection. After imaging acquisition, patients were treated with 750 mg of durvalumab every 2 wk. Tracer biodistribution and tumor uptake were visually assessed and quantified as SUV, and both imaging acquisitions were compared. Tumor tracer uptake was correlated with PD-L1 expression and clinical outcome, defined as response to durvalumab treatment. Results: Thirteen patients were included, and 10 completed all scheduled PET scans. No tracer-related adverse events were observed, and all patients started durvalumab treatment. Biodistribution analysis showed Zr-89-durvalumab accumulation in the blood pool, liver, and spleen. Serial imaging showed that image acquisition 120 h after injection delivered the best tumor-to-blood pool ratio. Most tumor lesions were visualized with the tracer dose only versus the coinjection imaging acquisition (25% vs. 13.5% of all lesions). Uptake heterogeneity was observed within (SUVpeak range, 0.2-15.1) and between patients. Tumor uptake was higher in patients with treatment response or stable disease than in patients with disease progression according to RECIST 1.1. However, this difference was not statistically significant (median SUVpeak , 4.9 vs. 2.4; P = 0.06). SUVpeak correlated better with the combined tumor and immune cell PD-L1 score than with PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, although neither was statistically significant (P = 0.06 and P = 0.93, respectively). Conclusion: Zr-89-durvalumab was safe, without any tracer-related adverse events, and more tumor lesions were visualized using the tracer dose-only imaging acquisition. Zr-89-durvalumab tumor uptake was higher in patients with a response to durvalumab treatment but did not correlate with tumor PD-L1 immunohistochemistry. Show less
Context: There is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate criteria for recruitment, monitoring, and reclassification in active surveillance (AS) protocols for localised prostate cancer (PCa)... Show moreContext: There is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate criteria for recruitment, monitoring, and reclassification in active surveillance (AS) protocols for localised prostate cancer (PCa).Objective: To perform a qualitative systematic review (SR) to issue recommendations regarding inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, biopsy characteristics at inclusion and monitoring, and repeat biopsy strategy.Evidence acquisition: A protocol-driven, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-adhering SR incorporating AS protocols published from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were criteria for inclusion of intermediate-risk disease, monitoring, reclassification, and repeat biopsy strategies (per protocol and/or triggered). Clinical effectiveness data were not assessed.Evidence synthesis: Of the 17 011 articles identified, 333 studies incorporating 375 AS protocols, recruiting 264 852 patients, were included. Only a minority of protocols included the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for recruitment (n = 17), follow-up (n = 47), and reclassification (n = 26). More than 50% of protocols included patients with intermediate or high-risk disease, whilst 44.1% of protocols excluded low-risk patients with more than three positive cores, and 39% of protocols excluded patients with core involvement (CI) >50% per core. Of the protocols, >= 80% mandated a confirmatory transrectal ultrasound biopsy; 72% (n = 189) of protocols mandated per-protocol repeat biopsies, with 20% performing this annually and 25% every 2 yr. Only 27 protocols (10.3%) mandated triggered biopsies, with 74% of these protocols defining progression or changes on MRI as triggers for repeat biopsy.Conclusions: For AS protocols in which the use of MRI is not mandatory or absent, we recommend the following: (1) AS can be considered in patients with low-volume International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 (three or fewer positive cores and cancer involvement <= 50% CI per core) or another single element of intermediate-risk disease, and patients with ISUP 3 should be excluded; (2) per-protocol confirmatory prostate biopsies should be performed within 2 yr, and per-protocol surveillance repeat biopsies should be performed at least once every 3 yr for the first 10 yr; and (3) for patients with low-volume, low-risk disease at recruitment, if repeat systematic biopsies reveal more than three positive cores or maximum CI >50% per core, they should be monitored closely for evidence of adverse features (eg, upgrading); patients with ISUP 2 disease with increased core positivity and/or CI to similar thresholds should be reclassified.Patient summary: We examined the literature to issue new recommendations on active surveillance (AS) for managing localised prostate cancer. The recommendations include setting criteria for including men with more aggressive disease (intermediate-risk disease), setting thresholds for close monitoring of men with low-risk but more extensive disease, and determining when to perform repeat biopsies (within 2 yr and 3 yearly thereafter). (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology. Show less
Bijlstra, O.D.; Boreel, M.M.E.; Mossel, S. van; Burgmans, M.C.; Kapiteijn, E.H.W.; Oprea-Lager, D.E.; ... ; Geus-Oei, L.F. de 2022
(1) Background: Up to 50% of patients with colorectal cancer either have synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) or develop CRLM over the course of their disease. Surgery and thermal... Show more(1) Background: Up to 50% of patients with colorectal cancer either have synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) or develop CRLM over the course of their disease. Surgery and thermal ablation are the most common local treatment options of choice. Despite development and improvement in local treatment options, (local) recurrence remains a significant clinical problem. Many different imaging modalities can be used in the follow-up after treatment of CRLM, lacking evidence-based international consensus on the modality of choice. In this systematic review, we evaluated 18F-FDG-PET-CT performance after surgical resection, thermal ablation, radioembolization, and neoadjuvant and palliative chemotherapy based on current published literature. (2) Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on the PubMed database. (3) Results: A total of 31 original articles were included in the analysis. Only one suitable study was found describing the role of 18F-FDG-PET-CT after surgery, which makes it hard to draw a firm conclusion. 18F-FDG-PET-CT showed to be of additional value in the follow-up after thermal ablation, palliative chemotherapy, and radioembolization. 18F-FDG-PET-CT was found to be a poor to moderate predictor of pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. (4) Conclusions: 18F-FDG-PET-CT is superior to conventional morphological imaging modalities in the early detection of residual disease after thermal ablation and in the treatment evaluation and prediction of prognosis during palliative chemotherapy and after radioembolization, and 18F-FDG-PET-CT could be considered in selected cases after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection. Show less
Bijlstra, O.D.; Boreel, M.M.E.; Mossel, S. van; Burgmans, M.C.; Kapiteijn, E.H.W.; Oprea-Lager, D.E.; ... ; Geus-Oei, L.F. de 2022
(1) Background: Up to 50% of patients with colorectal cancer either have synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) or develop CRLM over the course of their disease. Surgery and thermal... Show more(1) Background: Up to 50% of patients with colorectal cancer either have synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) or develop CRLM over the course of their disease. Surgery and thermal ablation are the most common local treatment options of choice. Despite development and improvement in local treatment options, (local) recurrence remains a significant clinical problem. Many different imaging modalities can be used in the follow-up after treatment of CRLM, lacking evidence-based international consensus on the modality of choice. In this systematic review, we evaluated F-18-FDG-PET-CT performance after surgical resection, thermal ablation, radioembolization, and neoadjuvant and palliative chemotherapy based on current published literature. (2) Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on the PubMed database. (3) Results: A total of 31 original articles were included in the analysis. Only one suitable study was found describing the role of F-18-FDG-PET-CT after surgery, which makes it hard to draw a firm conclusion. F-18-FDG-PET-CT showed to be of additional value in the follow-up after thermal ablation, palliative chemotherapy, and radioembolization. F-18-FDG-PET-CT was found to be a poor to moderate predictor of pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. (4) Conclusions: F-18-FDG-PET-CT is superior to conventional morphological imaging modalities in the early detection of residual disease after thermal ablation and in the treatment evaluation and prediction of prognosis during palliative chemotherapy and after radioembolization, and F-18-FDG-PET-CT could be considered in selected cases after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection. Show less
Fournier, L.; Geus-Oei, L.F. de; Regge, D.; Oprea-Lager, D.E.; D'Anastasi, M.; Bidaut, L.; ... ; Caramella, C. 2022
Response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are currently the reference standard for evaluating efficacy of therapies in patients with solid tumours who are included in clinical... Show moreResponse evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are currently the reference standard for evaluating efficacy of therapies in patients with solid tumours who are included in clinical trials, and they are widely used and accepted by regulatory agencies. This expert statement discusses the principles underlying RECIST, as well as their reproducibility and limitations. While the RECIST framework may not be perfect, the scientific bases for the anticancer drugs that have been approved using a RECIST-based surrogate endpoint remain valid. Importantly, changes in measurement have to meet thresholds defined by RECIST for response classification within thus partly circumventing the problems of measurement variability. The RECIST framework also applies to clinical patients in individual settings even though the relationship between tumour size changes and outcome from cohort studies is not necessarily translatable to individual cases. As reproducibility of RECIST measurements is impacted by reader experience, choice of target lesions and detection/interpretation of new lesions, it can result in patients changing response categories when measurements are near threshold values or if new lesions are missed or incorrectly interpreted. There are several situations where RECIST will fail to evaluate treatment-induced changes correctly; knowledge and understanding of these is crucial for correct interpretation. Also, some patterns of response/progression cannot be correctly documented by RECIST, particularly in relation to organ-site (e.g. bone without associated soft-tissue lesion) and treatment type (e.g. focal therapies). These require specialist reader experience and communication with oncologists to determine the actual impact of the therapy and best evaluation strategy. In such situations, alternative imaging markers for tumour response may be used but the sources of variability of individual imaging techniques need to be known and accounted for. Communication between imaging experts and oncologists regarding the level of confidence in a biomarker is essential for the correct interpretation of a biomarker and its application to clinical decision-making. Though measurement automation is desirable and potentially reduces the variability of results, associated technical difficulties must be overcome, and human adjudications may be required. Show less
Simple Summary Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a dismal prognosis, mainly due to difficulty in early detection of the disease by current imaging modalities. In this review, we discuss... Show moreSimple Summary Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a dismal prognosis, mainly due to difficulty in early detection of the disease by current imaging modalities. In this review, we discuss the more specific diagnostic imaging modality that evaluates the presence of specific tumour tracers via positron emission tomography. In addition, we review the available therapeutic applications of these tumour-specific tracers. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an inauspicious prognosis, mainly due to difficulty in early detection of the disease by the current imaging modalities. The upcoming development of tumour-specific tracers provides an alternative solution for more accurate diagnostic imaging techniques for staging and therapy response monitoring. The future goal to strive for, in a patient with PDAC, should definitely be first to receive a diagnostic dose of an antibody labelled with a radionuclide and to subsequently receive a therapeutic dose of the same labelled antibody with curative intent. In the first part of this paper, we summarise the available evidence on tumour-targeted diagnostic tracers for molecular positron emission tomography (PET) imaging that have been tested in humans, together with their clinical indications. Tracers such as radiolabelled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-in particular, F-18-labelled PSMA-already validated and successfully implemented in clinical practice for prostate cancer, also seem promising for PDAC. In the second part, we discuss the theranostic applications of these tumour-specific tracers. Although targeted radionuclide therapy is still in its infancy, lessons can already be learned from early publications focusing on dose fractioning and adding a radiosensitiser, such as gemcitabine. Show less
Metastatic tumor deposits in bone marrow elicit differential bone responses that vary with the type of malignancy. This results in either sclerotic, lytic, or mixed bone lesions, which can change... Show moreMetastatic tumor deposits in bone marrow elicit differential bone responses that vary with the type of malignancy. This results in either sclerotic, lytic, or mixed bone lesions, which can change in morphology due to treatment effects and/or secondary bone remodeling. Hence, morphological imaging is regarded unsuitable for response assessment of bone metastases and in the current Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors 1.1 (RECIST1.1) guideline bone metastases are deemed unmeasurable. Nevertheless, the advent of functional and molecular imaging modalities such as whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) has improved the ability for follow-up of bone metastases, regardless of their morphology. Both these modalities not only have improved sensitivity for visual detection of bone lesions, but also allow for objective measurements of bone lesion characteristics. WB-MRI provides a global assessment of skeletal metastases and for a one-step "all-organ" approach of metastatic disease. Novel MRI techniques include diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) targeting highly cellular lesions, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) for quantitative assessment of bone lesion vascularization, and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) combining anatomical and functional sequences. Recommendations for a homogenization of MRI image acquisitions and generalizable response criteria have been developed. For PET, many metabolic and molecular radiotracers are available, some targeting tumor characteristics not confined to cancer type (e.g. F-18-FDG) while other targeted radiotracers target specific molecular characteristics, such as prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligands for prostate cancer. Supporting data on quantitative PET analysis regarding repeatability, reproducibility, and harmonization of PET/CT system performance is available. Bone metastases detected on PET and MRI can be quantitatively assessed using validated methodologies, both on a whole-body and individual lesion basis. Both have the advantage of covering not only bone lesions but visceral and nodal lesions as well. Hybrid imaging, combining PET with MRI, may provide complementary parameters on the morphologic, functional, metabolic and molecular level of bone metastases in one examination. For clinical implementation of measuring bone metastases in response assessment using WB-MRI and PET, current RECIST1.1 guidelines need to be adapted. This review summarizes available data and insights into imaging of bone metastases using MRI and PET. Show less
Borm, F.J.; Smit, J.; Oprea-Lager, D.E.; Wondergem, M.; Haanen, J.B.A.G.; Smit, E.F.; Langen, A.J. de 2021
Simple Summary In cancer treatment, immunotherapy is increasingly becoming important as a component of first-line treatment and has improved the prognosis of patients since its introduction. A... Show moreSimple Summary In cancer treatment, immunotherapy is increasingly becoming important as a component of first-line treatment and has improved the prognosis of patients since its introduction. A large group of patients, however, do not respond to immunotherapy, and predicting a treatment response remains challenging. Furthermore, evaluating a response using conventional computed tomography (CT) scans is not straightforward due to the different mechanism of action of immunotherapy compared to chemotherapy. This review provides an overview of positron emission tomography (PET) in predicting and evaluating treatment response to immunotherapy. In multiple malignancies, checkpoint inhibitor therapy has an established role in the first-line treatment setting. However, only a subset of patients benefit from checkpoint inhibition, and as a result, the field of biomarker research is active. Molecular imaging with the use of positron emission tomography (PET) is one of the biomarkers that is being studied. PET tracers such as conventional F-18-FDG but also PD-(L)1 directed tracers are being evaluated for their predictive power. Furthermore, the use of artificial intelligence is under evaluation for the purpose of response prediction. Response evaluation during checkpoint inhibitor therapy can be challenging due to the different response patterns that can be observed compared to traditional chemotherapy. The additional information provided by PET can potentially be of value to evaluate a response early after the start of treatment and provide the clinician with important information about the efficacy of immunotherapy. Furthermore, the use of PET to stratify between patients with a complete response and those with a residual disease can potentially guide clinicians to identify patients for which immunotherapy can be discontinued and patients for whom the treatment needs to be escalated. This review provides an overview of the use of positron emission tomography (PET) to predict and evaluate treatment response to immunotherapy. Show less
Fournier, L.; Costaridou, L.; Bidaut, L.; Michoux, N.; Lecouvet, F.E.; Geus-Oei, L.F. de; ... ; European Soc Radiology 2021
Existing quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are associated with known biological tissue characteristics and follow a well-understood path of technical, biological and clinical validation before... Show moreExisting quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are associated with known biological tissue characteristics and follow a well-understood path of technical, biological and clinical validation before incorporation into clinical trials. In radiomics, novel data-driven processes extract numerous visually imperceptible statistical features from the imaging data with no a priori assumptions on their correlation with biological processes. The selection of relevant features (radiomic signature) and incorporation into clinical trials therefore requires additional considerations to ensure meaningful imaging endpoints. Also, the number of radiomic features tested means that power calculations would result in sample sizes impossible to achieve within clinical trials. This article examines how the process of standardising and validating data-driven imaging biomarkers differs from those based on biological associations. Radiomic signatures are best developed initially on datasets that represent diversity of acquisition protocols as well as diversity of disease and of normal findings, rather than within clinical trials with standardised and optimised protocols as this would risk the selection of radiomic features being linked to the imaging process rather than the pathology. Normalisation through discretisation and feature harmonisation are essential pre-processing steps. Biological correlation may be performed after the technical and clinical validity of a radiomic signature is established, but is not mandatory. Feature selection may be part of discovery within a radiomics-specific trial or represent exploratory endpoints within an established trial; a previously validated radiomic signature may even be used as a primary/secondary endpoint, particularly if associations are demonstrated with specific biological processes and pathways being targeted within clinical trials. Show less
The aim of this work was to quantify the uptake of F-18-BMS-986192, a programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) adnectin PET tracer, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. To this end, plasma... Show moreThe aim of this work was to quantify the uptake of F-18-BMS-986192, a programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) adnectin PET tracer, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. To this end, plasma input kinetic modeling of dynamic tumor uptake data with online arterial blood sampling was performed. In addition, the accuracy of simplified uptake metrics such as SUV was investigated. Methods: Data from a study with F-18-BMS-986192 in patients with advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer eligible for nivolumab treatment were used if a dynamic scan was available and lesions were present in the field of view of the dynamic scan. After injection of F-18-BMS-986192, a 60-min dynamic PET/CT scan was started, followed by a 30-min whole-body PET/CT scan. Continuous arterial and discrete arterial and venous blood sampling were performed to determine a plasma input function. Tumor time-activity curves were fitted by several plasma input kinetic models. Simplified uptake parameters included tumor-to-blood ratio as well as several SUV measures. Results: Twenty-two tumors in 9 patients were analyzed. The arterial plasma input single-tissue reversible compartment model with fitted blood volume fraction seems to be the most preferred model as it best fitted 11 of 18 tumor time-activity curves. The distribution volume (V-T) ranged from 0.4 to 4.8 mL.cm(-3). Similar values were obtained with an image-derived input function. From the simplified measures, SUV normalized for body weight at 50 and 67 min after injection correlated best with V-T, with an R-2 of more than 0.9. Conclusion: A single-tissue reversible model can be used to quantify tumor uptake of the PD-L1 PET tracer F-18-BMS-986192. SUV at 60 min after injection, normalized for body weight, is an accurate simplified parameter for uptake assessment of baseline studies. To assess its predictive value for response evaluation during programmed cell death protein 1 or PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibition, further validation of SUV against V-T based on an image-derived input function is recommended. Show less
A cardiac evaluation before orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is imperative. Previous investigations have demonstrated that mild to moderate reversible perfusion defects on myocardial... Show moreA cardiac evaluation before orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is imperative. Previous investigations have demonstrated that mild to moderate reversible perfusion defects on myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) in general are associated with a low risk for perioperative cardiac events. The objective of this study was to assess any perfusion defects in consecutive patients with chronic liver disease who were undergoing OLT. OLT candidates underwent extensive cardiovascular screening that included, among other methods, MPS. Patients who had no contraindications for surgery and underwent OLT were followed up. The occurrence and risk of complications and mortality were compared in 3 groups of patients: patients with normal MPS results, patients with any reversible defect, and patients with a fixed perfusion defect on MPS. In all, 156 subsequent patients underwent OLT. One or more reversible segmental perfusion defects on MPS were present in 14 patients (< 3 segments, n = 12; 3 segments without obstructive coronary artery disease, n = 2). The risk of complications did not differ significantly between patients with normal MPS findings and patients with a reversible perfusion defect (odds ratio = 3.04, 95% confidence interval = 0.65-14.26, P = 0.16), although the study was not sufficiently powered to show a difference. The presence of 1 or more reversible defects on MPS was significantly associated with an increased incidence of all-cause 1-year mortality (hazard ratio = 3.17, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-9.83, P = 0.046). No significant difference in the outcomes of patients with normal MPS findings and patients with a fixed defect on MPS was found; the study was, however, not adequately powered to do so. In conclusion, the results of this small cohort study indicate that patients with mild to moderate reversible perfusion defects on MPS may have inferior survival characteristics in comparison with patients with normal MPS results. A prospective, adequately powered study is required to confirm the results of this study. Liver Transpl 17:261-269, 2011. (C) 2011 AASLD. Show less
