Quality assessment of positron emission tomography scans: recommendations for future multicentre trials

Clinical use of positron emission tomography for radiotherapy planning - Medical physics considerations

PET/CT imaging plays an increasing role in radiotherapy treatment planning. The aim of this article was to identify the major use cases and technical as well as medical physics challenges during integration of these data into treatment planning. Dedicated aspects, such as (i) PET/CT-based radiotherapy simulation, (ii) PET-based target volume delineation, (iii) functional avoidance to optimized organ-at-risk sparing and (iv) functionally adapted individualized radiotherapy are discussed in this article. Furthermore, medical physics aspects to be taken into account are summarized and presented in form of check-lists.

NaF-PET Imaging of Atherosclerosis Burden

The method of 18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) of atherosclerosis was introduced 12 years ago. This approach is particularly interesting because it demonstrates microcalcification as an incipient sign of atherosclerosis before the development of arterial wall macrocalcification detectable by CT. However, this method has not yet found its place in the clinical routine. The more exact association between NaF uptake and future arterial calcification is not fully understood, and it remains unclear to what extent NaF-PET may replace or significantly improve clinical cardiovascular risk scoring. The first 10 years of publications in the field were characterized by heterogeneity at multiple levels, and it is not clear how the method may contribute to triage and management of patients with atherosclerosis, including monitoring effects of anti-atherosclerosis intervention. The present review summarizes findings from the recent 2¾ years including the ability of NaF-PET imaging to assess disease progress and evaluate response to treatment. Despite valuable new information, pertinent questions remain unanswered, not least due to a pronounced lack of standardization within the field and of well-designed long-term studies illuminating the natural history of atherosclerosis and effects of intervention.

COMP Report: CPQR technical quality control guidelines for use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in radiation treatment planning

Positron emission tomography with x-ray computed tomography (PET/CT) is increasingly being utilized for radiation treatment planning (RTP). Accurate delivery of RT therefore depends on quality PET/CT data. This study covers quality control (QC) procedures required for PET/CT for diagnostic imaging and incremental QC required for RTP. Based on a review of the literature, it compiles a list of recommended tests, performance frequencies, and tolerances, as well as references to documents detailing how to perform each test. The report was commissioned by the Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists as part of the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy initiative.

Simultaneous PET/MRI: The future gold standard for characterizing motor neuron disease-A clinico-radiological and neuroscientific perspective

Neuroimaging assessment of motor neuron disease has turned into a cornerstone of its clinical workup. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), as a paradigmatic motor neuron disease, has been extensively studied by advanced neuroimaging methods, including molecular imaging by MRI and PET, furthering finer and more specific details of the cascade of ALS neurodegeneration and symptoms, facilitated by multicentric studies implementing novel methodologies. With an increase in multimodal neuroimaging data on ALS and an exponential improvement in neuroimaging technology, the need for harmonization of protocols and integration of their respective findings into a consistent model becomes mandatory. Integration of multimodal data into a model of a continuing cascade of functional loss also calls for the best attempt to correlate the different molecular imaging measurements as performed at the shortest inter-modality time intervals possible. As outlined in this perspective article, simultaneous PET/MRI, nowadays available at many neuroimaging research sites, offers the perspective of a one-stop shop for reproducible imaging biomarkers on neuronal damage and has the potential to become the new gold standard for characterizing motor neuron disease from the clinico-radiological and neuroscientific perspectives.

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) combined with immunotherapy (L19-IL2) versus standard of care in stage IV NSCLC patients, ImmunoSABR: a multicentre, randomised controlled open-label phase II trial

BACKGROUND

About 50% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients have metastatic disease at initial diagnosis, which limits their treatment options and, consequently, the 5-year survival rate (15%). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), either alone or in combination with chemotherapy, have become standard of care (SOC) for most good performance status patients. However, most patients will not obtain long-term benefit and new treatment strategies are therefore needed. We previously demonstrated clinical safety of the tumour-selective immunocytokine L19-IL2, consisting of the anti-ED-B scFv L19 antibody coupled to IL2, combined with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR).

METHODS

This investigator-initiated, multicentric, randomised controlled open-label phase II clinical trial will test the hypothesis that the combination of SABR and L19-IL2 increases progression free survival (PFS) in patients with limited metastatic NSCLC. One hundred twenty-six patients will be stratified according to their metastatic load (oligo-metastatic: ≤5 or poly-metastatic: 6 to 10) and randomised to the experimental-arm (E-arm) or the control-arm (C-arm). The C-arm will receive SOC, according to the local protocol. E-arm oligo-metastatic patients will receive SABR to all lesions followed by L19-IL2 therapy; radiotherapy for poly-metastatic patients consists of irradiation of one (symptomatic) to a maximum of 5 lesions (including ICI in both arms if this is the SOC). The accrual period will be 2.5-years, starting after the first centre is initiated and active. Primary endpoint is PFS at 1.5-years based on blinded radiological review, and secondary endpoints are overall survival, toxicity, quality of life and abscopal response. Associative biomarker studies, immune monitoring, CT-based radiomics, stool collection, iRECIST and tumour growth rate will be performed.

DISCUSSION

The combination of SABR with or without ICI and the immunocytokine L19-IL2 will be tested as 1st, 2nd or 3rd line treatment in stage IV NSCLC patients in 14 centres located in 6 countries. This bimodal and trimodal treatment approach is based on the direct cytotoxic effect of radiotherapy, the tumour selective immunocytokine L19-IL2, the abscopal effect observed distant from the irradiated metastatic site(s) and the memory effect. The first results are expected end 2023.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ImmunoSABR Protocol Code: NL67629.068.18; EudraCT: 2018-002583-11; Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03705403; ISRCTN ID: ISRCTN49817477; Date of registration: 03-April-2019.

Robust, independent and relevant prognostic 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography radiomics features in non-small cell lung cancer: Are there any?

In locally advanced lung cancer, established baseline clinical variables show limited prognostic accuracy and ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) radiomics features may increase accuracy for optimal treatment selection. Their robustness and added value relative to current clinical factors are unknown. Hence, we identify robust and independent PET radiomics features that may have complementary value in predicting survival endpoints. A 4D PET dataset (n = 70) was used for assessing the repeatability (Bland-Altman analysis) and independence of PET radiomics features (Spearman rank: |ρ|<0.5). Two 3D PET datasets combined (n = 252) were used for training and validation of an elastic net regularized generalized logistic regression model (GLM) based on a selection of clinical and robust independent PET radiomics features (GLM_all). The fitted model performance was externally validated (n = 40). The performance of GLM_all (measured with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, AUC) was highest in predicting 2-year overall survival (0.66±0.07). No significant improvement was observed for GLM_all compared to a model containing only PET radiomics features or only clinical variables for any clinical endpoint. External validation of GLM_all led to AUC values no higher than 0.55 for any clinical endpoint. In this study, robust independent FDG PET radiomics features did not have complementary value in predicting survival endpoints in lung cancer patients. Improving risk stratification and clinical decision making based on clinical variables and PET radiomics features has still been proven difficult in locally advanced lung cancer patients.

Challenges and caveats of a multi-center retrospective radiomics study: an example of early treatment response assessment for NSCLC patients using FDG-PET/CT radiomics

Background

Prognostic models based on individual patient characteristics can improve treatment decisions and outcome in the future. In many (radiomic) studies, small size and heterogeneity of datasets is a challenge that often limits performance and potential clinical applicability of these models. The current study is example of a retrospective multi-centric study with challenges and caveats. To highlight common issues and emphasize potential pitfalls, we aimed for an extensive analysis of these multi-center pre-treatment datasets, with an additional ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scan acquired during treatment.

Methods

The dataset consisted of 138 stage II-IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients from four different cohorts acquired from three different institutes. The differences between the cohorts were compared in terms of clinical characteristics and using the so-called ‘cohort differences model’ approach. Moreover, the potential prognostic performances for overall survival of radiomic features extracted from CT or FDG-PET, or relative or absolute differences between the scans at the two time points, were assessed using the LASSO regression method. Furthermore, the performances of five different classifiers were evaluated for all image sets.

Results

The individual cohorts substantially differed in terms of patient characteristics. Moreover, the cohort differences model indicated statistically significant differences between the cohorts. Neither LASSO nor any of the tested classifiers resulted in a clinical relevant prognostic model that could be validated on the available datasets.

Conclusion

The results imply that the study might have been influenced by a limited sample size, heterogeneous patient characteristics, and inconsistent imaging parameters. No prognostic performance of FDG-PET or CT based radiomics models can be reported. This study highlights the necessity of extensive evaluations of cohorts and of validation datasets, especially in retrospective multi-centric datasets.

A review on radiomics and the future of theranostics for patient selection in precision medicine

The growing complexity and volume of clinical data and the associated decision-making processes in oncology promote the advent of precision medicine. Precision (or personalised) medicine describes preventive and/or treatment procedures that take individual patient variability into account when proscribing treatment, and has been hindered in the past by the strict requirements of accurate, robust, repeatable and preferably non-invasive biomarkers to stratify both the patient and the disease. In oncology, tumour subtypes are traditionally measured through repeated invasive biopsies, which are taxing for the patient and are cost and labour intensive. Quantitative analysis of routine clinical imaging provides an opportunity to capture tumour heterogeneity non-invasively, cost-effectively and on large scale. In current clinical practice radiological images are qualitatively analysed by expert radiologists whose interpretation is known to suffer from inter- and intra-operator variability. Radiomics, the high-throughput mining of image features from medical images, provides a quantitative and robust method to assess tumour heterogeneity, and radiomics-based signatures provide a powerful tool for precision medicine in cancer treatment. This study aims to provide an overview of the current state of radiomics as a precision medicine decision support tool. We first provide an overview of the requirements and challenges radiomics currently faces in being incorporated as a tool for precision medicine, followed by an outline of radiomics' current applications in the treatment of various types of cancer. We finish with a discussion of possible future advances that can further develop radiomics as a precision medicine tool.

What you see is (not) what you get: tools for a non-radiologist to evaluate image quality in lung cancer

Medical images are an integral part of oncological patient records and they are reviewed by many different specialists. Therefore, it is important that besides imaging experts, other clinicians are also aware that the diagnostic value of a scan is influenced by the applied imaging protocol. Based on two clinical lung cancer trials, we experienced that, even within a study protocol, there is a large variability in imaging parameters, which has direct impact on the interpretation of the image. These two trials were: 1) the NTR3628 in which the added value of gadolinium magnetic resonance imaging (Gd-MRI) to dedicated contrast enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) for detecting asymptomatic brain metastases in stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was investigated and 2) a sub-study of the NVALT 12 trial (NCT01171170) in which repeated 18 F-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (¹⁸F-FDG-PET) imaging for early response assessment was investigated. Based on the problems encountered in the two trials, we provide recommendations for non-radiology clinicians, which can be used in daily interpretation of imaging. Variations in image parameters cannot only influence trial results, but sub-optimal imaging can also influence treatment decisions in daily lung cancer care, when a physician is not aware of the scanning details.