The Attenuation Distribution Across the Long Axis of Breast Cancer Liver Metastases at CT: A Quantitative Biomarker for Predicting Overall Survival

ePAD: An Image Annotation and Analysis Platform for Quantitative Imaging

Medical imaging is critical for assessing the response of patients to new cancer therapies. Quantitative lesion assessment on images is time-consuming, and adopting new promising quantitative imaging biomarkers of response in clinical trials is challenging. The electronic Physician Annotation Device (ePAD) is a freely available web-based zero-footprint software application for viewing, annotation, and quantitative analysis of radiology images designed to meet the challenges of quantitative evaluation of cancer lesions. For imaging researchers, ePAD calculates a variety of quantitative imaging biomarkers that they can analyze and compare in ePAD to identify potential candidates as surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. For clinicians, ePAD provides clinical decision support tools for evaluating cancer response through reports summarizing changes in tumor burden based on different imaging biomarkers. As a workflow management and study oversight tool, ePAD lets clinical trial project administrators create worklists for users and oversee the progress of annotations created by research groups. To support interoperability of image annotations, ePAD writes all image annotations and results of quantitative imaging analyses in standardized file formats, and it supports migration of annotations from various propriety formats. ePAD also provides a plugin architecture supporting MATLAB server-side modules in addition to client-side plugins, permitting the community to extend the ePAD platform in various ways for new cancer use cases. We present an overview of ePAD as a platform for medical image annotation and quantitative analysis. We also discuss use cases and collaborations with different groups in the Quantitative Imaging Network and future directions.

Tissue sampling in the era of precision medicine: comparison of percutaneous biopsies performed for clinical trials or tumor genomics versus routine clinical care

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to determine if patients undergoing percutaneous biopsy for genetic profiling are undergoing more biopsies (procedures, passes per procedure), or experiencing more procedure-related complications.

METHODS

60 patients undergoing biopsy procedures for genetic profiling were retrospectively compared with 60 consecutive control patients undergoing routine biopsies. Procedural details and related complications were collected. Results were analyzed using t-tests and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Biopsied organs included mainly lung (n = 31), liver (n = 50), and lymph nodes (n = 18). The average number of core biopsy passes was 3.45 in the study group and 2.18 in the control group (0.73, 1.81; p = 0.0001). The average study patient underwent 1.44 biopsy procedures by radiology from 2016 to 2017, whereas the average control patient underwent 1.08 (0.1657, 0.5010, p = 0.0002). Results were similar when looking at the subset of patients undergoing liver biopsies. In our cohort of 120 patients total, only 6 complications were noted. There were 4 complications in the control patients and 2 complications in the study patients, all of which were pneumothoraces in patients undergoing lung biopsy; only 2 of these required treatment. The odds ratio for a complication occurring from an increase in one core biopsy is 1.07 (0.601, 1.573; p = 0.775), suggesting no significant relationship among the number of biopsies taken and the probability of complication in this cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients being biopsied for genetic profiling or clinical study enrollment are undergoing more biopsy procedures and more biopsy passes per procedure, but are not experiencing a detectable increased rate of complications in this small cohort, single-center study.