1
|
Rozeman EA, Versluis JM, Sikorska K, Hoefsmit EP, Dimitriadis P, Rao D, Lacroix R, Grijpink-Ongering LG, Lopez-Yurda M, Heeres BC, van de Wiel BA, Flohil C, Sari A, Heijmink SWTPJ, van den Broek D, Broeks A, de Groot JWB, Vollebergh MA, Wilgenhof S, van Thienen JV, Haanen JBAG, Blank CU. IMPemBra: a phase 2 study comparing pembrolizumab with intermittent/short-term dual MAPK pathway inhibition plus pembrolizumab in patients with melanoma harboring the BRAFV600 mutation. J Immunother Cancer 2023; 11:e006821. [PMID: 37479483 PMCID: PMC10364170 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2023-006821] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/18/2023] [Indexed: 07/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Continuous combination of MAPK pathway inhibition (MAPKi) and anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1 (PD-(L)1) showed high response rates, but only limited improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) at the cost of a high frequency of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma. Short-term MAPKi induces T-cell infiltration in patients and is synergistic with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) in a preclinical melanoma mouse model. The aim of this phase 2b trial was to identify an optimal regimen of short-term MAPKi with dabrafenib plus trametinib in combination with pembrolizumab. METHODS Patients with treatment-naïve BRAFV600E/K-mutant advanced melanoma started pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. In week 6, patients were randomized to continue pembrolizumab only (cohort 1), or to receive, in addition, intermittent dabrafenib 150 mg two times per day plus trametinib 2 mg one time per day for two cycles of 1 week (cohort 2), two cycles of 2 weeks (cohort 3), or continuously for 6 weeks (cohort 4). All cohorts continued pembrolizumab for up to 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and treatment-adherence. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) at week 6, 12, 18 and PFS. RESULTS Between June 2016 and August 2018, 33 patients with advanced melanoma have been included and 32 were randomized. Grade 3-4 TRAE were observed in 12%, 12%, 50%, and 63% of patients in cohort 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. All planned targeted therapy was given in 88%, 63%, and 38% of patients in cohort 2, 3, and 4. ORR at week 6, 12, and 18 were 38%, 63%, and 63% in cohort 1; 25%, 63%, and 75% in cohort 2; 25%, 50%, and 75% in cohort 3; and 0%, 63%, and 50% in cohort 4. After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, median PFS was 10.6 months for pembrolizumab monotherapy and not reached for patients treated with pembrolizumab and intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib (p=0.17). The 2-year and 3-year landmark PFS were both 25% for cohort 1, both 63% for cohort 2, 50% and 38% for cohort 3 and 75% and 60% for cohort 4. CONCLUSIONS The combination of pembrolizumab plus intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib seems more feasible and tolerable than continuous triple therapy. The efficacy is promising and appears to be favorable over pembrolizumab monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02625337.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisa A Rozeman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Judith M Versluis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karolina Sikorska
- Department of Biometrics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esmée P Hoefsmit
- Division of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Petros Dimitriadis
- Division of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Disha Rao
- Division of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ruben Lacroix
- Division of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Marta Lopez-Yurda
- Department of Biometrics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Birthe C Heeres
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bart A van de Wiel
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Claudie Flohil
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aysegul Sari
- Department of Biometrics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Daan van den Broek
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Annegien Broeks
- Core Facility and Biobanking, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Marieke A Vollebergh
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sofie Wilgenhof
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes V van Thienen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - John B A G Haanen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christian U Blank
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Division of Molecular Oncology and Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Staal FC, Taghavi M, Hong EK, Tissier R, van Treijen M, Heeres BC, van der Zee D, Tesselaar ME, Beets-Tan RG, Maas M. CT-based radiomics to distinguish progressive from stable neuroendocrine liver metastases treated with somatostatin analogues: an explorative study. Acta Radiol 2023; 64:1062-1070. [PMID: 35702011 DOI: 10.1177/02841851221106598] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Accurate response evaluation in patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) remains a challenge. Radiomics has shown promising results regarding response assessment. PURPOSE To differentiate progressive (PD) from stable disease (SD) with radiomics in patients with NELM undergoing somatostatin analogue (SSA) treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 46 patients with histologically confirmed gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NET) with ≥1 NELM and ≥2 computed tomography (CT) scans were included. Response was assessed with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST1.1). Hepatic target lesions were manually delineated and analyzed with radiomics. Radiomics features were extracted from each NELM on both arterial-phase (AP) and portal-venous-phase (PVP) CT. Multiple instance learning with regularized logistic regression via LASSO penalization (with threefold cross-validation) was used to classify response. Three models were computed: (i) AP model; (ii) PVP model; and (iii) AP + PVP model for a lesion-based and patient-based outcome. Next, clinical features were added to each model. RESULTS In total, 19 (40%) patients had PD. Median follow-up was 13 months (range 1-50 months). Radiomics models could not accurately classify response (area under the curve 0.44-0.60). Adding clinical variables to the radiomics models did not significantly improve the performance of any model. CONCLUSION Radiomics features were not able to accurately classify response of NELM on surveillance CT scans during SSA treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Femke Cr Staal
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, 5211Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, 1228Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam/University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M Taghavi
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, 5211Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Eun K Hong
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, 5211Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, 26725Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Renaud Tissier
- Biostatistics Center, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mark van Treijen
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, 1228Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam/University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, 8124University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Birthe C Heeres
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Margot Et Tesselaar
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, 1228Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam/University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Regina Gh Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, 5211Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, 1228The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rozeman EA, Versluis JM, Hoefsmit EP, Dimitriadis P, Grijpink-Ongering LG, Sikorska K, van de Wiel BA, Heeres BC, Flohil C, Kvistborg P, van den Broek D, Broeks A, de Groot JW, Wilgenhof S, Vollebergh MA, van Thienen JV, Haanen JBAG, Blank CU. IMPemBra, a phase 2 study comparing pembrolizumab with intermittent/short‐term dual MAPK pathway inhibition plus pembrolizumab in patients with melanoma harboring the BRAFV600 mutation: Three-year survival data and translational analyses. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.9552] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
9552 Background: Continuous combination of MAPK pathway inhibition (MAPKi) and anti-PD-(L)1 showed high response rates, but also high frequency of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) in BRAFV600-mutated melanoma patients (pts). Short‐time MAPKi already induces T cell infiltration in pts and was synergistic with anti-PD‐1 in a pre-clinical model. This phase 2b trial aimed to identify the optimal duration of MAPKi with dabrafenib + trametinib (D+T) in combination with pembrolizumab (PEM). We have previously shown that no SUSARs were observed, toxicity was related to duration of D+T, and response rates increased after addition of D+T. Here we present 3-year PFS and OS data and results of translational analyses. Methods: In IMPemBra, pts with treatment-naïve BRAFV600E/K mutant advanced melanoma started with PEM 200mg Q3W. After 2 cycles, pts were randomized to continue PEM only (cohort 1) or to receive in addition intermittent dabrafenib 150 mg BID + trametinib 2mg QD for 2 x 1 week (cohort 2), 2 x 2 weeks (cohort 3) or continuous for 6 weeks (cohort 4). All cohorts continued PEM for up to 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety, treatment adherence and immune-activating capacity of the different regimens. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and PFS, OS was an exploratory endpoint. For survival analyses, pts that received D+T (cohort 2-4) were pooled. Results: Thirty-two pts were randomized, 56% were male, 53% had M1c disease and 88% had a LDH level < ULN. No new grade 3-4 TRAE were observed; frequencies were 12%, 12%, 50% and 62% for pts in cohort 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. ORRs were 75% in cohort 1 and 2, and 88% in cohort 3 and 4. The frequency of PD1+CD8+ T cells in peripheral blood decreased slightly during treatment and there were no differences between cohorts. In cohort 1 and 2, an increase in IFNγ signature in tumor biopsies was already observed after 6 weeks of PEM, in cohort 3-4 an increase in IFNγ signature was observed in week 9, after addition of D+T. The same pattern was observed for CD8+ T cell infiltration and PD-L1 expression. After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, the median PFS of pts treated with PEM monotherapy was 10.6 months versus 32.3 months for pts treated with PEM plus D+T (p = 0.19). The 3-year PFS rates were 25.0% and 50.0% respectively. Median OS was 40.5 months in the PEM pts and not reached for pts treated with PEM plus D+T (p = 0.32); 3-year OS rates were 62.5% and 70.8% respectively. Conclusions: IMPemBra demonstrated that short-term addition of intermittent D+T to PEM seems a more feasible, tolerable and an effective alternative for the continuous triple combination. In addition, it gives the opportunity to treat with second line targeted therapy after disease progression. Therefore, this regimen should be considered for further investigation in a larger cohort. Clinical trial information: NCT02625337.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Claudi Flohil
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Pia Kvistborg
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Annegien Broeks
- Core Facility Molecular Pathology and Biobanking, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Sofie Wilgenhof
- Division of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Treijen MJC, Schoevers JMH, Heeres BC, van der Zee D, Maas M, Valk GD, Tesselaar MET. Defining disease status in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Choi-criteria or RECIST? Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47:1071-1081. [PMID: 34989825 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03393-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2021] [Revised: 12/15/2021] [Accepted: 12/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Adequate monitoring of changes in tumor load is fundamental for the assessment of the course of disease and response to treatment. There is an ongoing debate on the utility of RECIST v1.1 in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). METHODS In this retrospective real-life cohort study, Choi-criteria were compared with RECIST v1.1. The agreement between both criteria and the association with survival endpoints were evaluated. RESULTS Seventy-five patients were included with a median follow-up of 35 months (range 8-53). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) according to RECIST v1.1 was 15 months (range 2-50) compared to 14 months (range 2-50) in Choi. According to RECIST, 33 (44%) patients were classified as having stable disease (SD), 40 (53%) as progressive disease (PD) and two (3%) patients as partial response (PR), compared to 9 (12%) patients classified as SD, 50 (67%) as PD and 16 (21%) as PR according to Choi-criteria. Overall concordance between the criteria was moderate (Cohen's Kappa = 0.408, p < 0.001) and agreement varied between 57 and 69% at each consecutive scan (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed significant differences in overall survival (OS) for RECIST v1.1 categories PD and non-PD (log-rank p = 0.02), however, in Choi no significant differences in OS were found (p = 0.27). CONCLUSION RECIST v1.1 had a better clinical utility and prognostic value compared to Choi-criteria. Still, RECIST were also not sufficient to adequately predict OS. This outlines the need for new tools that provides accurate information on the disease course and treatment response to support precise prognostication in patients with GEP-NETs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M J C van Treijen
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - J M H Schoevers
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B C Heeres
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D van der Zee
- Department of Radiology, Bernhoven Hospital, Uden, The Netherlands
| | - M Maas
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G D Valk
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M E T Tesselaar
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Staal FCR, Beets-Tan RGH, Heeres BC, Houwers J, de Boer M, van Dorth D, Lambregts DMJ, Maas M. Magnetic resonance assessment of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases is not reproducible. Acta Radiol 2021; 62:1133-1141. [PMID: 32972213 DOI: 10.1177/0284185120957988] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) due to chemotherapy can cause severe hepatotoxicity, leading to impaired outcome in patients with colorectal cancer. A previous study introduced gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (Gd-EOB-MRI) to diagnose SOS. PURPOSE To assess the reproducibility of Gd-EOB-MRI-based SOS diagnosis and its relationship with response to chemotherapy and long-term outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty-six Gd-EOB-MRI scans of patients undergoing chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) were retrospectively analyzed. Three radiologists, blinded to clinical data, independently scored presence and severity of SOS on a 5-point scale (0, definitely not present to 4, definitely present). Patients with a score ≥3 were considered SOS+. Inter-observer agreement between readers was assessed with kappa statistics. Response (RECIST 1.1.), occurrence of new CRLM during follow-up (hepatic progression) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients with and without SOS. RESULTS The inter-observer agreement of SOS scores was poor, with quadratic kappas of 0.17-0.40. For the binary outcome of SOS+ (confidence level [CL] 3-4) vs. SOS- (CL 0-2) agreement was poor, with kappas of 0.03-0.37. Median follow-up was 24 months (range 4-44 months). Response and OS between patients with and without SOS did not differ significantly for any of the readers. CONCLUSION Inter-observer agreement for the diagnosis of SOS on Gd-EOB-MRI is poor. No significant correlation with relevant outcomes was found for any of the readers. Therefore, MRI for SOS diagnosis might be less useful than previously reported. Other techniques should be explored to accurately diagnose SOS in absence of histological confirmation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Femke CR Staal
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Regina GH Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Birthe C Heeres
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Janneke Houwers
- Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| | - Myrte de Boer
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Danielle van Dorth
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Doenja MJ Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
van Treijen MJC, van der Zee D, Heeres BC, Staal FCR, Vriens MR, Saveur LJ, Verbeek WHM, Korse CM, Maas M, Valk GD, Tesselaar MET. Blood Molecular Genomic Analysis Predicts the Disease Course of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Patients: A Validation Study of the Predictive Value of the NETest®. Neuroendocrinology 2021; 111:586-598. [PMID: 32492680 DOI: 10.1159/000509091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2020] [Accepted: 06/02/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Reliable prediction of disease status is a major challenge in managing gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). The aim of the study was to validate the NETest®, a blood molecular genomic analysis, for predicting the course of disease in individual patients compared to chromogranin A (CgA). NETest® score (normal ≤20%) and CgA level (normal <100 µg/L) were measured in 152 GEP-NETs. The median follow-up was 36 (4-56) months. Progression-free survival was blindly assessed (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST] version 1.1). Optimal cutoffs (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]), odds ratios, as well as negative and positive predictive values (NPVs/PPVs) were calculated for predicting stable disease (SD) and progressive disease (PD). Of the 152 GEP-NETs, 86% were NETest®-positive and 52% CgA-positive. -NETest® AUC was 0.78 versus CgA 0.73 (p = ns). The optimal cutoffs for predicting SD/PD were 33% for the NETest® and 140 µg/L for CgA. Multivariate analyses identified NETest® as the strongest predictor for PD (odds ratio: 5.7 [score: 34-79%]; 12.6 [score: ≥80%]) compared to CgA (odds ratio: 3.0), tumor grade (odds ratio: 3.1), or liver metastasis (odds ratio: 7.7). The NETest® NPV for SD was 87% at 12 months. The PPV for PD was 47 and 64% (scores 34-79% and ≥80%, respectively). NETest® metrics were comparable in the watchful waiting, treatment, and no evidence of disease (NED) subgroups. For CgA (>140 ng/mL), NPV and PPV were 83 and 52%. CgA could not predict PD in the watchful waiting or NED subgroups. The NETest® reliably predicted SD and was the strongest predictor of PD. CgA had lower utility. The -NETest® anticipates RECIST-defined disease status up to 1 year before imaging alterations are apparent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark J C van Treijen
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands,
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands,
| | | | - Birthe C Heeres
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Femke C R Staal
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Menno R Vriens
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lisette J Saveur
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wieke H M Verbeek
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Catharina M Korse
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Clinical Chemistry, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gerlof D Valk
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Margot E T Tesselaar
- Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETS Center of Excellence, Netherlands Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kok END, Jansen EPM, Heeres BC, Kok NFM, Janssen T, van Werkhoven E, Sanders FRK, Ruers TJM, Nowee ME, Kuhlmann KFD. High versus low dose Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for hepatic metastases. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2019; 20:45-50. [PMID: 31886419 PMCID: PMC6906721 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.11.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2019] [Revised: 11/11/2019] [Accepted: 11/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
SBRT for liver metastases is a safe alternative for surgical resection or ablation. High dose (>100 Gy) SBRT provides better local control than low dose (≤100 Gy) SBRT. Toxicity rates of SBRT are low and do not increase after dose escalation. Dose escalation is positively associated with overall survival.
Introduction Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) is a treatment option for patients with liver metastases. This study evaluated the impact of high versus low dose image-guided SBRT of hepatic metastases. Methods and materials This is a single-center retrospective study of patients with liver metastases treated with SBRT. For analyses, patients were divided into two groups: ≤100 Gy and >100 Gy near-minimum Biological Effective Doses (BED98%). The main outcomes were local control (LC), toxicity and overall survival (OS). Cox regression analyses were performed to determine prognostic variables on LC and OS. Results Ninety patients with 97 liver metastases (77% colorectal) were included. Median follow-up was 28.6 months. The two-year LC rates in the ≤100 Gy and >100 Gy BED98% group were 60% (CI: 41–80%) and 90% (CI: 80–100%), respectively (p = 0.004). Grade 3 toxicity occurred in 7% vs 2% in the ≤100 Gy and >100 Gy group (p = 0.23). Two-year OS rates in the ≤100 Gy and >100 Gy group were 48% (CI: 32–65%) and 85% (CI: 73–97%), respectively (p = 0.007). In multivariable Cox regression analyses, group dose and tumor volume were significantly correlated with LC (HR: 3.61; p = 0.017 and HR: 1.01; p = 0.005) and OS (HR: 2.38; p = 0.005 and HR: 1.01; p = <0.0001). Conclusion High dose SBRT provides significantly better local control and overall survival than low dose SBRT without increasing toxicity. When surgical resection is not feasible, high dose SBRT provides an effective and safe treatment for liver metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther N D Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Edwin P M Jansen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Birthe C Heeres
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tomas Janssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Erik van Werkhoven
- Medical Biostatistics, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Fay R K Sanders
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Theodore J M Ruers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Technical University of Twente, Faculty TNW, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Marlies E Nowee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Koert F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
van der Linden E, Pattynama PMT, Heeres BC, de Jong SC, Hop WCJ, Kroft LJM. Long-term Patient Satisfaction after Percutaneous Treatment of Peripheral Vascular Malformations. Radiology 2009; 251:926-32. [DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2513081579] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
|
9
|
Liauw L, Palm-Meinders IH, van der Grond J, Leijser LM, le Cessie S, Laan LAEM, Heeres BC, van Buchem MA, van Wezel-Meijler G. Differentiating normal myelination from hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy on T1-weighted MR Images: a new approach. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007; 28:660-5. [PMID: 17416817 PMCID: PMC7977352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Hypoxic-ischemic cerebral changes can be difficult to distinguish from normal myelination on T1-weighted images. We hypothesized that comparing signal intensity (SI) of brain structures on T1-weighted images enables differentiation of myelination from hypoxic-ischemic brain damage. MATERIALS AND METHODS T1-weighted images, obtained in 57 infants aged 1-104 days and born after a gestational age of 35 weeks or older, were retrospectively evaluated. Subjects were assigned to a patient (n = 23, with perinatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy [HIE] stage 2/3) or a control group (n = 34). In each subject, an SI score was assigned to 19 brain structures on the basis of pairwise comparisons with the other 18 structures. In both groups, mean total SI scores were calculated for the 19 structures. Independent samples t tests assessed whether the mean total score of a structure differed significantly between the 2 groups. Logistic regression assessed which comparison was best to distinguish between the groups and to predict the presence of hypoxic-ischemic injury. RESULTS In patients, mean total SI scores for posterolateral putamen (PP) and peri-Rolandic cortex (PC) were significantly higher (P = .000 for both). Mean total SI scores of the posterior limb of internal capsule (PLIC) and the corona radiata (CR) were significantly lower in patients (P = .000 and 0.005, respectively). Two comparisons (PLIC versus CR, PP versus PC) were best to distinguish patients and controls and to predict absence or presence of HIE (P < .0001). CONCLUSION SI changes due to hypoxia-ischemia can be differentiated from normal myelination by comparing SI of 4 brain structures on T1-weighted images.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Liauw
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|