Imaging Glioblastoma With 18F-Fluciclovine Amino Acid Positron Emission Tomography

Histomolecular Validation of [18F]-FACBC in Gliomas Using Image-Localized Biopsies

BACKGROUND

Gliomas have a heterogeneous nature, and identifying the most aggressive parts of the tumor and defining tumor borders are important for histomolecular diagnosis, surgical resection, and radiation therapy planning. This study evaluated [18F]-FACBC PET for glioma tissue classification.

METHODS

Pre-surgical [18F]-FACBC PET/MR images were used during surgery and image-localized biopsy sampling in patients with high- and low-grade glioma. TBR was compared to histomolecular results to determine optimal threshold values, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values for the classification of tumor tissue. Additionally, PET volumes were determined in patients with glioblastoma based on the optimal threshold. [18F]-FACBC PET volumes and diagnostic accuracy were compared to ce-T1 MRI. In total, 48 biopsies from 17 patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

[18F]-FACBC had low uptake in non-glioblastoma tumors, but overall higher sensitivity and specificity for the classification of tumor tissue (0.63 and 0.57) than ce-T1 MRI (0.24 and 0.43). Additionally, [18F]-FACBC TBR was an excellent classifier for IDH1-wildtype tumor tissue (AUC: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.71-0.96). In glioblastoma patients, PET tumor volumes were on average eight times larger than ce-T1 MRI volumes and included 87.5% of tumor-positive biopsies compared to 31.5% for ce-T1 MRI.

CONCLUSION

The addition of [18F]-FACBC PET to conventional MRI could improve tumor classification and volume delineation.

MRI and amino acid PET detection of whole-brain tumor burden

Background

[18F]fluciclovine amino acid PET has shown promise for detecting brain tumor regions undetected on conventional anatomic MRI scans. However, it remains unclear which of these modalities provides a better assessment of the whole brain tumor burden. This study quantifies the performance of [18F]fluciclovine PET and MRI for detecting the whole brain tumor burden.

Methods

Thirteen rats were orthotopically implanted with fluorescently transduced human glioblastoma cells. Rats underwent MRI (T1- and T2-weighted) and [18F]fluciclovine PET. Next brains were excised, optically cleared, and scanned ex vivo with fluorescence imaging. All images were co-registered using a novel landmark-based registration to enable a spatial comparison. The tumor burden identified on the fluorescent images was considered the ground truth for comparison with the in vivo imaging.

Results

Across all cases, the PET sensitivity for detecting tumor burden (median 0.67) was not significantly different than MRI (combined T1+T2-weighted) sensitivity (median 0.61; p=0.85). However, the combined PET+MRI sensitivity (median 0.86) was significantly higher than MRI alone (41% higher; p=0.004) or PET alone (28% higher; p=0.0002). The specificity of combined PET+MRI (median=0.91) was significantly lower compared with MRI alone (6% lower; p=0.004) or PET alone (2% lower; p=0.002).

Conclusion

In these glioblastoma xenografts, [18F]fluciclovine PET did not provide a significant increase in tumor burden detection relative to conventional anatomic MRI. However, a combined PET and MRI assessment did significantly improve detection sensitivity relative to either modality alone, suggesting potential value in a combined assessment for some tumors.

Opportunities for improving brain cancer treatment outcomes through imaging-based mathematical modeling of the delivery of radiotherapy and immunotherapy

Immunotherapy has become a fourth pillar in the treatment of brain tumors and, when combined with radiation therapy, may improve patient outcomes and reduce the neurotoxicity. As with other combination therapies, the identification of a treatment schedule that maximizes the synergistic effect of radiation- and immune-therapy is a fundamental challenge. Mechanism-based mathematical modeling is one promising approach to systematically investigate therapeutic combinations to maximize positive outcomes within a rigorous framework. However, successful clinical translation of model-generated combinations of treatment requires patient-specific data to allow the models to be meaningfully initialized and parameterized. Quantitative imaging techniques have emerged as a promising source of high quality, spatially and temporally resolved data for the development and validation of mathematical models. In this review, we will present approaches to personalize mechanism-based modeling frameworks with patient data, and then discuss how these techniques could be leveraged to improve brain cancer outcomes through patient-specific modeling and optimization of treatment strategies.