1
|
Kocak B, Akinci D'Antonoli T, Mercaldo N, Alberich-Bayarri A, Baessler B, Ambrosini I, Andreychenko AE, Bakas S, Beets-Tan RGH, Bressem K, Buvat I, Cannella R, Cappellini LA, Cavallo AU, Chepelev LL, Chu LCH, Demircioglu A, deSouza NM, Dietzel M, Fanni SC, Fedorov A, Fournier LS, Giannini V, Girometti R, Groot Lipman KBW, Kalarakis G, Kelly BS, Klontzas ME, Koh DM, Kotter E, Lee HY, Maas M, Marti-Bonmati L, Müller H, Obuchowski N, Orlhac F, Papanikolaou N, Petrash E, Pfaehler E, Pinto Dos Santos D, Ponsiglione A, Sabater S, Sardanelli F, Seeböck P, Sijtsema NM, Stanzione A, Traverso A, Ugga L, Vallières M, van Dijk LV, van Griethuysen JJM, van Hamersvelt RW, van Ooijen P, Vernuccio F, Wang A, Williams S, Witowski J, Zhang Z, Zwanenburg A, Cuocolo R. METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS): a quality scoring tool for radiomics research endorsed by EuSoMII. Insights Imaging 2024; 15:8. [PMID: 38228979 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-023-01572-w] [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] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 01/18/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To propose a new quality scoring tool, METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), to assess and improve research quality of radiomics studies. METHODS We conducted an online modified Delphi study with a group of international experts. It was performed in three consecutive stages: Stage#1, item preparation; Stage#2, panel discussion among EuSoMII Auditing Group members to identify the items to be voted; and Stage#3, four rounds of the modified Delphi exercise by panelists to determine the items eligible for the METRICS and their weights. The consensus threshold was 75%. Based on the median ranks derived from expert panel opinion and their rank-sum based conversion to importance scores, the category and item weights were calculated. RESULT In total, 59 panelists from 19 countries participated in selection and ranking of the items and categories. Final METRICS tool included 30 items within 9 categories. According to their weights, the categories were in descending order of importance: study design, imaging data, image processing and feature extraction, metrics and comparison, testing, feature processing, preparation for modeling, segmentation, and open science. A web application and a repository were developed to streamline the calculation of the METRICS score and to collect feedback from the radiomics community. CONCLUSION In this work, we developed a scoring tool for assessing the methodological quality of the radiomics research, with a large international panel and a modified Delphi protocol. With its conditional format to cover methodological variations, it provides a well-constructed framework for the key methodological concepts to assess the quality of radiomic research papers. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT A quality assessment tool, METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), is made available by a large group of international domain experts, with transparent methodology, aiming at evaluating and improving research quality in radiomics and machine learning. KEY POINTS • A methodological scoring tool, METRICS, was developed for assessing the quality of radiomics research, with a large international expert panel and a modified Delphi protocol. • The proposed scoring tool presents expert opinion-based importance weights of categories and items with a transparent methodology for the first time. • METRICS accounts for varying use cases, from handcrafted radiomics to entirely deep learning-based pipelines. • A web application has been developed to help with the calculation of the METRICS score ( https://metricsscore.github.io/metrics/METRICS.html ) and a repository created to collect feedback from the radiomics community ( https://github.com/metricsscore/metrics ).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Burak Kocak
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences, Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital, Basaksehir, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Tugba Akinci D'Antonoli
- Institute of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cantonal Hospital Baselland, Liestal, Switzerland.
| | - Nathaniel Mercaldo
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Bettina Baessler
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Ilaria Ambrosini
- Department of Translational Research, Academic Radiology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Anna E Andreychenko
- Laboratory for Digital Public Health Technologies, ITMO University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
| | - Spyridon Bakas
- Division of Computational Pathology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA
- Center for Federated Learning in Precision Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Keno Bressem
- Department of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt- Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Irene Buvat
- Institut Curie, Inserm, PSL University, Laboratory of Translational Imaging in Oncology, Orsay, France
| | - Roberto Cannella
- Section of Radiology - Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics (BiND), University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | | | - Armando Ugo Cavallo
- Division of Radiology, Istituto Dermopatico dell'Immacolata (IDI) IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Leonid L Chepelev
- Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Linda Chi Hang Chu
- The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA
| | - Aydin Demircioglu
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital , Essen, Germany
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Matthias Dietzel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | | | - Andrey Fedorov
- Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Laure S Fournier
- Department of Radiology, Université Paris Cité, AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, PARCC UMRS 970, INSERM, Paris, France
| | | | - Rossano Girometti
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, University of Udine, University Hospital S. Maria della Misericordia, Udine, Italy
| | - Kevin B W Groot Lipman
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Georgios Kalarakis
- Department of Neuroradiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Radiology, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Radiology, Medical School, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece
| | - Brendan S Kelly
- Department of Radiology, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
- Insight Centre for Data Analytics, UCD, Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Michail E Klontzas
- Department of Medical Imaging, University Hospital of Heraklion, Crete, Greece
- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Crete, Greece
- Computational Biomedicine Laboratory, Institute of Computer Science, FORTH, Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Dow-Mu Koh
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Elmar Kotter
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Ho Yun Lee
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Science & Technology (SAIHST), Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Mario Maas
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Luis Marti-Bonmati
- Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain
| | - Henning Müller
- University of Applied Sciences of Western Switzerland (HES-SO Valais), Sierra, Switzerland
- Department of Radiology and Medical Informatics, University of Geneva (UniGe), Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Nancy Obuchowski
- Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Fanny Orlhac
- Institut Curie, Inserm, PSL University, Laboratory of Translational Imaging in Oncology, Orsay, France
| | - Nikolaos Papanikolaou
- Computational Clinical Imaging Group, Centre for the Unknown, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital and The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Ekaterina Petrash
- Radiology department, Research Institute of Pediatric Oncology and Hematology n. a. L.A. Durnov, National Medical Research Center of Oncology n. a. N.N. Blokhin Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia
- Medical Department IRA-Labs, Moscow, Russia
| | - Elisabeth Pfaehler
- Institute for advanced simulation (IAS-8): Machine learning and data analytics, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany
| | - Daniel Pinto Dos Santos
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Goethe-University Frankfurt Am Main, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Andrea Ponsiglione
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Sebastià Sabater
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete, Albacete, Spain
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Philipp Seeböck
- Computational Imaging Research Lab, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Nanna M Sijtsema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Arnaldo Stanzione
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Alberto Traverso
- Department of Radiotherapy, Maastro Clinic, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- School of Medicine, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Ugga
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Martin Vallières
- Department of Computer Science, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada
- Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada
| | - Lisanne V van Dijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Robbert W van Hamersvelt
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Peter van Ooijen
- Department of Radiotherapy, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Federica Vernuccio
- Section of Radiology, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnosis (Bi.N.D), University of Palermo, Palermo, 90127, Italy
| | - Alan Wang
- Centre for Medical Imaging & Centre for Brain Research, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, Auckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Stuart Williams
- Department of Radiology, Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, Colney Lane, Norwich, Norfolk, UK
| | - Jan Witowski
- Department of Radiology, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, USA
| | - Zhongyi Zhang
- School of Information and Communication Technology, Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Alex Zwanenburg
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT/UCC), Dresden, Germany
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Renato Cuocolo
- Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Salerno, Baronissi, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mansur MB, deSouza NM, Natrajan R, Abegglen LM, Schiffman JD, Greaves M. Evolutionary determinants of curability in cancer. Nat Ecol Evol 2023; 7:1761-1770. [PMID: 37620552 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-023-02159-w] [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] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2023] [Accepted: 07/05/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
The emergence of drug-resistant cells, most of which have a mutated TP53 gene, prevents curative treatment in most advanced and common metastatic cancers of adults. Yet, a few, rarer malignancies, all of which are TP53 wild type, have high cure rates. In this Perspective, we discuss how common features of curable cancers offer insights into the evolutionary and developmental determinants of drug resistance. Acquired loss of TP53 protein function is the most common genetic change in cancer. This probably reflects positive selection in the context of strong ecosystem pressures including microenvironmental hypoxia. Loss of TP53's functions results in multiple fitness benefits and enhanced evolvability of cancer cells. TP53-null cells survive apoptosis, and tolerate potent oncogenic signalling, DNA damage and genetic instability. In addition, critically, they provide an expanded pool of self-renewing, or stem, cells, the primary units of evolutionary selection in cancer, making subsequent adaptation to therapeutic challenge by drug resistance highly probable. The exceptional malignancies that are curable, including the common genetic subtype of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and testicular seminoma, differ from the common adult cancers in originating prenatally from embryonic or fetal cells that are developmentally primed for TP53-dependent apoptosis. Plus, they have other genetic and phenotypic features that enable dissemination without exposure to selective pressures for TP53 loss, retaining their intrinsic drug hypersensitivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Rachael Natrajan
- The Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, Division of Breast Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Lisa M Abegglen
- Department of Pediatrics and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Joshua D Schiffman
- Department of Pediatrics and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
- Peel Therapeutics, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Mel Greaves
- Centre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
deSouza NM, van der Lugt A, Hall TJ, Sullivan D, Zahlmann G. Delivering a Quantitative Imaging Agenda. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:4219. [PMID: 37686495 PMCID: PMC10486970 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174219] [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] [Received: 07/30/2023] [Revised: 08/02/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
In a digital image, each voxel contains quantitative information dependent on the technique used to generate the image [...].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M. deSouza
- The Institute of Cancer Research, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Aad van der Lugt
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Timothy J. Hall
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA
| | - Daniel Sullivan
- Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | - Gudrun Zahlmann
- Independent Consultant for Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA), Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), Oak Brook, IL 60523, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pasquier D, Bidaut L, Oprea-Lager DE, deSouza NM, Krug D, Collette L, Kunz W, Belkacemi Y, Bau MG, Caramella C, De Geus-Oei LF, De Caluwé A, Deroose C, Gheysens O, Herrmann K, Kindts I, Kontos M, Kümmel S, Linderholm B, Lopci E, Meattini I, Smeets A, Kaidar-Person O, Poortmans P, Tsoutsou P, Hajjaji N, Russell N, Senkus E, Talbot JN, Umutlu L, Vandecaveye V, Verhoeff JJC, van Oordt WMVDH, Zacho HD, Cardoso F, Fournier L, Van Duijnhoven F, Lecouvet FE. Designing clinical trials based on modern imaging and metastasis-directed treatments in patients with oligometastatic breast cancer: a consensus recommendation from the EORTC Imaging and Breast Cancer Groups. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:e331-e343. [PMID: 37541279 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00286-3] [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] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2023] [Revised: 06/06/2023] [Accepted: 06/09/2023] [Indexed: 08/06/2023]
Abstract
Breast cancer remains the most common cause of cancer death among women. Despite its considerable histological and molecular heterogeneity, those characteristics are not distinguished in most definitions of oligometastatic disease and clinical trials of oligometastatic breast cancer. After an exhaustive review of the literature covering all aspects of oligometastatic breast cancer, 35 experts from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Imaging and Breast Cancer Groups elaborated a Delphi questionnaire aimed at offering consensus recommendations, including oligometastatic breast cancer definition, optimal diagnostic pathways, and clinical trials required to evaluate the effect of diagnostic imaging strategies and metastasis-directed therapies. The main recommendations are the introduction of modern imaging methods in metastatic screening for an earlier diagnosis of oligometastatic breast cancer and the development of prospective trials also considering the histological and molecular complexity of breast cancer. Strategies for the randomisation of imaging methods and therapeutic approaches in different subsets of patients are also addressed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Pasquier
- Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France; University of Lille and CNRS, Centrale Lille, UMR 9189-CRIStAL, Lille, France.
| | - Luc Bidaut
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK
| | - Daniela Elena Oprea-Lager
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitaetsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein-Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Laurence Collette
- Former European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Wolfgang Kunz
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Yazid Belkacemi
- AP-HP, Radiation Oncology Department, Henri Mondor University Hospital, Créteil, France; INSERM Unit 955 (-Bio), IMRB, University of Paris-Est (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Maria Grazia Bau
- Azienda Ospedaliera Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Ospedale Sant'Anna, Turin, Italy
| | - Caroline Caramella
- Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint-Joseph, Paris, France
| | - Lioe-Fee De Geus-Oei
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands; Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands; Department of Radiation Science and Technology, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands
| | - Alex De Caluwé
- Radiotherapy Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Olivier Gheysens
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Institut du Cancer Roi Albert II, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Isabelle Kindts
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre, General Hospital Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Michalis Kontos
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Sherko Kümmel
- Breast Unit, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Department of Gynecology with Breast Center, Berlin, Germany
| | - Barbro Linderholm
- Department of Oncolgy, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden; Institution of Clinical Sciences, Department of Oncology, Sahlgrenska Academy at Gothenburg University, Gothenburg , Sweden
| | | | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Ann Smeets
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Orit Kaidar-Person
- Oncology Institute, Sheba Tel Hashomer, Ramat Gan, Israel; Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - Philip Poortmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Iridium Netwerk, Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Pelagia Tsoutsou
- Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Site de Cluse-Roseraie, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Nawale Hajjaji
- Medical Oncology Department, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France; Laboratoire Protéomique, Réponse Inflammatoire, et Spectrométrie De Masse (PRISM), Inserm U1192, Lille, France
| | - Nicola Russell
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni Van Leeuwenhoekziekenhuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Jean-Noël Talbot
- Institut National des Sciences et Techniques Nucléaires, CEA-Saclay, Paris, France
| | - Lale Umutlu
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | | | - Joost J C Verhoeff
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Helle D Zacho
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Fatima Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Laure Fournier
- Université Paris Descartes Sorbonne Paris Cité, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Frederieke Van Duijnhoven
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni Van Leeuwenhoekziekenhuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Frédéric E Lecouvet
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Institut du Cancer Roi Albert II, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jackson A, Pathak R, deSouza NM, Liu Y, Jacobs BKM, Litiere S, Urbanowicz-Nijaki M, Julie C, Chiti A, Theysohn J, Ayuso JR, Stroobants S, Waterton JC. MRI Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) as a Biomarker of Tumour Response: Imaging-Pathology Correlation in Patients with Hepatic Metastases from Colorectal Cancer (EORTC 1423). Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3580. [PMID: 37509240 PMCID: PMC10377224 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15143580] [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] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2023] [Revised: 06/29/2023] [Accepted: 06/30/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Tumour apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a putative pharmacodynamic/response biomarker but the relationship between drug-induced effects on the ADC and on the underlying pathology has not been adequately defined. Hypothesis: Changes in ADC during early chemotherapy reflect underlying histological markers of tumour response as measured by tumour regression grade (TRG). Methods: Twenty-six patients were enrolled in the study. Baseline, 14 days, and pre-surgery MRI were performed per study protocol. Surgical resection was performed in 23 of the enrolled patients; imaging-pathological correlation was obtained from 39 lesions from 21 patients. Results: There was no evidence of correlation between TRG and ADC changes at day 14 (study primary endpoint), and no significant correlation with other ADC metrics. In scans acquired one week prior to surgery, there was no significant correlation between ADC metrics and percentage of viable tumour, percentage necrosis, percentage fibrosis, or Ki67 index. Conclusions: Our hypothesis was not supported by the data. The lack of meaningful correlation between change in ADC and TRG is a robust finding which is not explained by variability or small sample size. Change in ADC is not a proxy for TRG in metastatic colorectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Jackson
- Centre for Imaging Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M20 4GJ, UK
| | - Ryan Pathak
- Centre for Imaging Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M20 4GJ, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, London SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Yan Liu
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 1200 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Bart K M Jacobs
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 1200 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Saskia Litiere
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 1200 Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Catherine Julie
- EA 4340 BECCOH, UVSQ, Universite Paris-Saclay, 92104 Boulogne-Billancourt, France
- Department of Pathology, APHP-Hopital Ambroise Pare, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France
| | - Arturo Chiti
- Nuclear Medicine Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Bio-Medical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20072 Milan, Italy
| | - Jens Theysohn
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, 45122 Essen, Germany
| | - Juan R Ayuso
- Radiology Department-CDI, Hospital Clinic Universitari de Barcelona, 08036 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sigrid Stroobants
- Molecular Imaging and Radiology, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium
| | - John C Waterton
- Centre for Imaging Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M20 4GJ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wang X, Pennello G, deSouza NM, Huang EP, Buckler AJ, Barnhart HX, Delfino JG, Raunig DL, Wang L, Guimaraes AR, Hall TJ, Obuchowski NA. Multiparametric Data-driven Imaging Markers: Guidelines for Development, Application and Reporting of Model Outputs in Radiomics. Acad Radiol 2023; 30:215-229. [PMID: 36411153 PMCID: PMC9825652 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.10.001] [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] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 09/21/2022] [Accepted: 10/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
This paper is the fifth in a five-part series on statistical methodology for performance assessment of multi-parametric quantitative imaging biomarkers (mpQIBs) for radiomic analysis. Radiomics is the process of extracting visually imperceptible features from radiographic medical images using data-driven algorithms. We refer to the radiomic features as data-driven imaging markers (DIMs), which are quantitative measures discovered under a data-driven framework from images beyond visual recognition but evident as patterns of disease processes irrespective of whether or not ground truth exists for the true value of the DIM. This paper aims to set guidelines on how to build machine learning models using DIMs in radiomics and to apply and report them appropriately. We provide a list of recommendations, named RANDAM (an abbreviation of "Radiomic ANalysis and DAta Modeling"), for analysis, modeling, and reporting in a radiomic study to make machine learning analyses in radiomics more reproducible. RANDAM contains five main components to use in reporting radiomics studies: design, data preparation, data analysis and modeling, reporting, and material availability. Real case studies in lung cancer research are presented along with simulation studies to compare different feature selection methods and several validation strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaofeng Wang
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave/JJN3, Cleveland, OH 44195.
| | - Gene Pennello
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration Division of Imaging, Diagnostic and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom; European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, European Society of Radiology, London, UK
| | - Erich P Huang
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | | | - Huiman X Barnhart
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Jana G Delfino
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | - David L Raunig
- Data Science Institute, Statistical and Quantitative Sciences, Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc, Lexington, Massachusetts
| | - Lu Wang
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave/JJN3, Cleveland, OH 44195
| | - Alexander R Guimaraes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health & Sciences University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Timothy J Hall
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Nancy A Obuchowski
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave/JJN3, Cleveland, OH 44195
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Huang EP, Pennello G, deSouza NM, Wang X, Buckler AJ, Kinahan PE, Barnhart HX, Delfino JG, Hall TJ, Raunig DL, Guimaraes AR, Obuchowski NA. Multiparametric Quantitative Imaging in Risk Prediction: Recommendations for Data Acquisition, Technical Performance Assessment, and Model Development and Validation. Acad Radiol 2023; 30:196-214. [PMID: 36273996 PMCID: PMC9825642 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.09.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 09/12/2022] [Accepted: 09/17/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Combinations of multiple quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are often able to predict the likelihood of an event of interest such as death or disease recurrence more effectively than single imaging measurements can alone. The development of such multiparametric quantitative imaging and evaluation of its fitness of use differs from the analogous processes for individual QIBs in several key aspects. A computational procedure to combine the QIB values into a model output must be specified. The output must also be reproducible and be shown to have reasonably strong ability to predict the risk of an event of interest. Attention must be paid to statistical issues not often encountered in the single QIB scenario, including overfitting and bias in the estimates of model performance. This is the fourth in a five-part series on statistical methodology for assessing the technical performance of multiparametric quantitative imaging. Considerations for data acquisition are discussed and recommendations from the literature on methodology to construct and evaluate QIB-based models for risk prediction are summarized. The findings in the literature upon which these recommendations are based are demonstrated through simulation studies. The concepts in this manuscript are applied to a real-life example involving prediction of major adverse cardiac events using automated plaque analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erich P Huang
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, MSC 9735, Bethesda, MD 20892-9735.
| | - Gene Pennello
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research (London, UK), European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance
| | - Xiaofeng Wang
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation
| | | | | | | | - Jana G Delfino
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration
| | - Timothy J Hall
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison
| | - David L Raunig
- Data Science Institute, Statistical and Quantitative Sciences, Takeda
| | | | - Nancy A Obuchowski
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Delfino JG, Pennello GA, Barnhart HX, Buckler AJ, Wang X, Huang EP, Raunig DL, Guimaraes AR, Hall TJ, deSouza NM, Obuchowski N. Multiparametric Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers for Phenotype Classification: A Framework for Development and Validation. Acad Radiol 2023; 30:183-195. [PMID: 36202670 PMCID: PMC9825632 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 09/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
This manuscript is the third in a five-part series related to statistical assessment methodology for technical performance of multi-parametric quantitative imaging biomarkers (mp-QIBs). We outline approaches and statistical methodologies for developing and evaluating a phenotype classification model from a set of multiparametric QIBs. We then describe validation studies of the classifier for precision, diagnostic accuracy, and interchangeability with a comparator classifier. We follow with an end-to-end real-world example of development and validation of a classifier for atherosclerotic plaque phenotypes. We consider diagnostic accuracy and interchangeability to be clinically meaningful claims for a phenotype classification model informed by mp-QIB inputs, aiming to provide tools to demonstrate agreement between imaging-derived characteristics and clinically established phenotypes. Understanding that we are working in an evolving field, we close our manuscript with an acknowledgement of existing challenges and a discussion of where additional work is needed. In particular, we discuss the challenges involved with technical performance and analytical validation of mp-QIBs. We intend for this manuscript to further advance the robust and promising science of multiparametric biomarker development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jana G Delfino
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD.
| | - Gene A Pennello
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD
| | - Huiman X Barnhart
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC
| | | | - Xiaofeng Wang
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Erich P Huang
- Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis - National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Dave L Raunig
- Data Science Institute, Statistical and Quantitative Sciences, Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc, Lexington, MA
| | - Alexander R Guimaraes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health & Sciences University, Portland, OR
| | - Timothy J Hall
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, the Insitute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology (ESR), Vienna, Austria
| | - Nancy Obuchowski
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tree AC, Satchwell L, Alexander E, Blasiak-Wal I, deSouza NM, Gao A, Greenlay E, McNair H, Parker C, Talbot J, Dearnaley D, Murray J. Standard and Hypofractionated Dose Escalation to Intraprostatic Tumor Nodules in Localized Prostate Cancer: 5-Year Efficacy and Toxicity in the DELINEATE Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:305-316. [PMID: 36150450 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.09.058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2022] [Revised: 08/25/2022] [Accepted: 09/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our purpose was to report 5-year efficacy and toxicity of intraprostatic lesion boosting using standard and hypofractionated radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS DELINEATE (ISRCTN 04483921) is a single center phase 2 multicohort study including standardly fractionated (cohort A: 74 Gy/37F to prostate and seminal vesicles [PSV]; cohort C 74 Gy/37F to PSV plus 60 Gy/37F to pelvic lymph nodes) and moderately hypofractionated (cohort B: 60 Gy/20F to PSV) prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate/high-risk disease. Patients received an integrated boost of 82 Gy (cohorts A and C) or 67 Gy (cohort B) to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging identified lesion(s). Primary endpoint was late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity at 1 year. Secondary endpoints were acute and late toxicity (clinician and patient reported) and freedom from biochemical/clinical failure at 5 years. RESULTS Two hundred and sixty-five men were recruited and 256 were treated (55 cohort A, 153 cohort B, and 48 cohort C). Median follow-up for each cohort was >5 years. Cumulative late RTOG grade 2+ GI toxicity at 1 year was 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9%-13.8%) (cohort A), 7.2% (95% CI, 4%-12.6%) (cohort B), and 8.4% (95% CI, 3.2%-20.8%) (cohort C). Cumulative late RTOG grade 2+ GI toxicity to 5 years was 12.8% (95% CI, 6.3%-25.1%) (cohort A), 14.6% (95% CI, 9.9%-21.4%) (cohort B), and 20.7% (95% CI, 11.2%-36.2%) (cohort C). Cumulative RTOG grade 2+ genitourinary toxicity to 5 years was 12.9% (95% CI, 6.4%-25.2%) (cohort A), 18.2% (95% CI, 12.8%-25.4%) (cohort B), and 18.2% (95% CI, 9.5%-33.2%) (cohort C). Five-year freedom from biochemical/clinical failure was 98.2% (95% CI, 87.8%-99.7%) (cohort A), 96.7% (95% CI, 91.3%- 98.8%) (cohort B), and 95.1% (95% CI, 81.6-98.7%) (cohort C). CONCLUSIONS The DELINEATE trial has shown safety, tolerability, and feasibility of focal boosting in 20 or 37 fractions. Efficacy results indicate a low chance of prostate cancer recurrence 5 years after radiation therapy. Evidence from ongoing phase 3 randomized trials is awaited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison C Tree
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom; Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom.
| | - Laura Satchwell
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Emma Alexander
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | | | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Annie Gao
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Emily Greenlay
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Helen McNair
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom; Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Chris Parker
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom; Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - James Talbot
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - David Dearnaley
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Julia Murray
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom; Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Obuchowski NA, Huang E, deSouza NM, Raunig D, Delfino J, Buckler A, Hatt C, Wang X, Moskowitz C, Guimaraes A, Giger M, Hall TJ, Kinahan P, Pennello G. A Framework for Evaluating the Technical Performance of Multiparameter Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers (mp-QIBs). Acad Radiol 2023; 30:147-158. [PMID: 36180328 PMCID: PMC9825639 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.08.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 08/19/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Multiparameter quantitative imaging incorporates anatomical, functional, and/or behavioral biomarkers to characterize tissue, detect disease, identify phenotypes, define longitudinal change, or predict outcome. Multiple imaging parameters are sometimes considered separately but ideally are evaluated collectively. Often, they are transformed as Likert interpretations, ignoring the correlations of quantitative properties that may result in better reproducibility or outcome prediction. In this paper we present three use cases of multiparameter quantitative imaging: i) multidimensional descriptor, ii) phenotype classification, and iii) risk prediction. A fourth application based on data-driven markers from radiomics is also presented. We describe the technical performance characteristics and their metrics common to all use cases, and provide a structure for the development, estimation, and testing of multiparameter quantitative imaging. This paper serves as an overview for a series of individual articles on the four applications, providing the statistical framework for multiparameter imaging applications in medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy A Obuchowski
- Quantitative Health Sciences /JJN3, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave. Cleveland, OH 44195.
| | - Erich Huang
- Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis - National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Huang, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology (ESR), Vienna, Austria
| | - David Raunig
- Data Science Institute, Takeda, Raunig, Hew Hope, PA
| | - Jana Delfino
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Delfino, Silver Spring, Maryland
| | | | - Charles Hatt
- University of Michigan, Hatt, Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Xiaofeng Wang
- Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Wang, Cleveland, OH
| | - Chaya Moskowitz
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Institute, Moskowitz, NYC, NY
| | - Alexander Guimaraes
- Department of Radiology, Oregon Health and Science University, Guimaraes, Oregon, Portland
| | - Maryellen Giger
- Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Giger, Chicago, IL
| | - Timothy J Hall
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Hall, Madison, WI
| | | | - Gene Pennello
- Division of Biostatistics, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, FDA, Pennello, Silver Spring, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
deSouza NM, Choudhury A, Greaves M, O’Connor JPB, Hoskin PJ. Imaging hypoxia in endometrial cancer: How and why should it be done? Front Oncol 2022; 12:1020907. [PMID: 36439503 PMCID: PMC9682004 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1020907] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2022] [Accepted: 10/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M. deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ananya Choudhury
- Radiation Oncology, The Christie National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- The Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Mel Greaves
- Centre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - James P. B. O’Connor
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- The Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Peter J. Hoskin
- The Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Radiation Oncology, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
deSouza NM, Gedroyc W, Rivens I, ter Haar G. Tissue specific considerations in implementing high intensity focussed ultrasound under magnetic resonance imaging guidance. Front Oncol 2022; 12:1037959. [PMID: 36387108 PMCID: PMC9663991 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1037959] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Accepted: 10/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
High-intensity focused ultrasound can ablate a target permanently, leaving tissues through which it passes thermally unaffected. When delivered under magnetic resonance (MR) imaging guidance, the change in tissue relaxivity on heating is used to monitor the temperatures achieved. Different tissue types in the pre-focal beam path result in energy loss defined by their individual attenuation coefficients. Furthermore, at interfaces with different acoustic impedances the beam will be both reflected and refracted, changing the position of the focus. For complex interfaces this effect is exacerbated. Moreover, blood vessels proximal to the focal region can dissipate heat, altering the expected region of damage. In the target volume, the temperature distribution depends on the thermal conductivity (or diffusivity) of the tissue and its heat capacity. These are different for vascular tissues, water and fat containing tissues and bone. Therefore, documenting the characteristics of the pre-focal and target tissues is critical for effective delivery of HIFU. MR imaging provides excellent anatomic detail and characterization of soft tissue components. It is an ideal modality for real-time planning and monitoring of HIFU ablation, and provides non-invasive temperature maps. Clinical applications involve soft-tissue (abdomino-pelvic applications) or bone (brain applications) pre-focally and at the target (soft-tissue tumors and bone metastases respectively). This article addresses the technical difficulties of delivering HIFU effectively when vascular tissues, densely cellular tissues, fat or bone are traversed pre-focally, and the clinical applications that target these tissues. The strengths and limitations of MR techniques used for monitoring ablation in these tissues are also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M. deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Wladyslaw Gedroyc
- Faculty of Medicine, St. Mary’s Hospital, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ian Rivens
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gail ter Haar
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
deSouza NM, van der Lugt A, Deroose CM, Alberich-Bayarri A, Bidaut L, Fournier L, Costaridou L, Oprea-Lager DE, Kotter E, Smits M, Mayerhoefer ME, Boellaard R, Caroli A, de Geus-Oei LF, Kunz WG, Oei EH, Lecouvet F, Franca M, Loewe C, Lopci E, Caramella C, Persson A, Golay X, Dewey M, O'Connor JPB, deGraaf P, Gatidis S, Zahlmann G. Standardised lesion segmentation for imaging biomarker quantitation: a consensus recommendation from ESR and EORTC. Insights Imaging 2022; 13:159. [PMID: 36194301 PMCID: PMC9532485 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-022-01287-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [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: 05/31/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
| | - Aad van der Lugt
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christophe M Deroose
- Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Luc Bidaut
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, Lincoln, LN6 7TS, UK
| | - Laure Fournier
- INSERM, Radiology Department, AP-HP, Hopital Europeen Georges Pompidou, Université de Paris, PARCC, 75015, Paris, France
| | - Lena Costaridou
- School of Medicine, University of Patras, University Campus, Rio, 26 500, Patras, Greece
| | - Daniela E Oprea-Lager
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Elmar Kotter
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Marion Smits
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marius E Mayerhoefer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ronald Boellaard
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anna Caroli
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Wolfgang G Kunz
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Edwin H Oei
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Frederic Lecouvet
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), 10 Avenue Hippocrate, 1200, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Manuela Franca
- Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas de Abel Salazar, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Christian Loewe
- Division of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, Department for Bioimaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Egesta Lopci
- Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS - Humanitas Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, MI, Italy
| | - Caroline Caramella
- Radiology Department, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Institut d'Oncologie Thoracique, Université Paris-Saclay, Le Plessis-Robinson, France
| | - Anders Persson
- Department of Radiology, and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Xavier Golay
- Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Marc Dewey
- Department of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - James P B O'Connor
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Pim deGraaf
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sergios Gatidis
- Department of Radiology, University of Tubingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Gudrun Zahlmann
- Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), Oak Brook, IL, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Wormald BW, Moser N, deSouza NM, Mantikas KT, Malpartida-Cardenas K, Pennisi I, Ind TEJ, Vroobel K, Kalofonou M, Rodriguez-Manzano J, Georgiou P. Lab-on-chip assay of tumour markers and human papilloma virus for cervical cancer detection at the point-of-care. Sci Rep 2022; 12:8750. [PMID: 35610285 PMCID: PMC9128326 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-12557-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2021] [Accepted: 04/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Cervical cancer affects over half a million people worldwide each year, the majority of whom are in resource-limited settings where cytology screening is not available. As persistent human papilloma virus (HPV) infections are a key causative factor, detection of HPV strains now complements cytology where screening services exist. This work demonstrates the efficacy of a handheld Lab-on-Chip (LoC) device, with an external sample extraction process, in detecting cervical cancer from biopsy samples. The device is based on Ion-Sensitive Field-Effect Transistor (ISFET) sensors used in combination with loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays, to amplify HPV DNA and human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) mRNA. These markers were selected because of their high levels of expression in cervical cancer cells, but low to nil expression in normal cervical tissue. The achieved analytical sensitivity for the molecular targets resolved down to a single copy per reaction for the mRNA markers, achieving a limit of detection of 102 for hTERT. In the tissue samples, HPV-16 DNA was present in 4/5 malignant and 2/5 benign tissues, with HPV-18 DNA being present in 1/5 malignant and 1/5 benign tissues. hTERT mRNA was detected in all malignant and no benign tissues, with the demonstrated pilot data to indicate the potential for using the LoC in cervical cancer screening in resource-limited settings on a large scale.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin W Wormald
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, London, SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Nicolas Moser
- Centre for Bio-Inspired Technology, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2BT, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, London, SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Katerina-Theresa Mantikas
- Centre for Bio-Inspired Technology, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2BT, UK
| | - Kenny Malpartida-Cardenas
- Centre for Bio-Inspired Technology, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2BT, UK
| | - Ivana Pennisi
- Department of Infectious Disease, Imperial College London, School of Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK
| | - Thomas E J Ind
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Katherine Vroobel
- Department of Pathology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Melpomeni Kalofonou
- Centre for Bio-Inspired Technology, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2BT, UK
| | - Jesus Rodriguez-Manzano
- Department of Infectious Disease, Imperial College London, School of Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, London, W2 1NY, UK
| | - Pantelis Georgiou
- Centre for Bio-Inspired Technology, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2BT, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Keenan KE, Delfino JG, Jordanova KV, Poorman ME, Chirra P, Chaudhari AS, Baessler B, Winfield J, Viswanath SE, deSouza NM. Challenges in ensuring the generalizability of image quantitation methods for MRI. Med Phys 2022; 49:2820-2835. [PMID: 34455593 PMCID: PMC8882689 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2021] [Revised: 08/17/2021] [Accepted: 08/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Image quantitation methods including quantitative MRI, multiparametric MRI, and radiomics offer great promise for clinical use. However, many of these methods have limited clinical adoption, in part due to issues of generalizability, that is, the ability to translate methods and models across institutions. Researchers can assess generalizability through measurement of repeatability and reproducibility, thus quantifying different aspects of measurement variance. In this article, we review the challenges to ensuring repeatability and reproducibility of image quantitation methods as well as present strategies to minimize their variance to enable wider clinical implementation. We present possible solutions for achieving clinically acceptable performance of image quantitation methods and briefly discuss the impact of minimizing variance and achieving generalizability towards clinical implementation and adoption.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn E. Keenan
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305, USA
| | - Jana G. Delfino
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, 10993 New Hampshire Ave, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA
| | - Kalina V. Jordanova
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305, USA
| | - Megan E. Poorman
- Physical Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305, USA
| | - Prathyush Chirra
- Dept of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA
| | - Akshay S. Chaudhari
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
- Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
| | - Bettina Baessler
- University Hospital of Zurich and University of Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jessica Winfield
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK
| | - Satish E. Viswanath
- Dept of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Gagliardi T, Adejolu M, deSouza NM. Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Ovarian Cancer: Exploiting Strengths and Understanding Limitations. J Clin Med 2022; 11:1524. [PMID: 35329850 PMCID: PMC8949455 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11061524] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Revised: 03/05/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Detection, characterization, staging, and response assessment are key steps in the imaging pathway of ovarian cancer. The most common type, high grade serous ovarian cancer, often presents late, so that accurate disease staging and response assessment are required through imaging in order to improve patient management. Currently, computerized tomography (CT) is the most common method for these tasks, but due to its poor soft-tissue contrast, it is unable to quantify early response within lesions before shrinkage is observed by size criteria. Therefore, quantifiable techniques, such as diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI), which generates high contrast between tumor and healthy tissue, are increasingly being explored. This article discusses the basis of diffusion-weighted contrast and the technical issues that must be addressed in order to achieve optimal implementation and robust quantifiable diffusion-weighted metrics in the abdomen and pelvis. The role of DW-MRI in characterizing adnexal masses in order to distinguish benign from malignant disease, and to differentiate borderline from frankly invasive malignancy is discussed, emphasizing the importance of morphological imaging over diffusion-weighted metrics in this regard. Its key role in disease staging and predicting resectability in comparison to CT is addressed, including its valuable use as a biomarker for following response within individual lesions, where early changes in the apparent diffusion coefficient in peritoneal metastases may be detected. Finally, the task of implementing DW-MRI into clinical trials in order to validate this biomarker for clinical use are discussed, along with the trials that include it within their protocols.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja Gagliardi
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (T.G.); (M.A.)
| | - Margaret Adejolu
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (T.G.); (M.A.)
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Department of Imaging, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK; (T.G.); (M.A.)
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW7 3RP, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Benafif S, Ni Raghallaigh H, McGrowder E, Saunders EJ, Brook MN, Saya S, Rageevakumar R, Wakerell S, James D, Chamberlain A, Taylor N, Hogben M, Benton B, D’Mello L, Myhill K, Mikropoulos C, Bowen‐Perkins H, Rafi I, Ferris M, Beattie A, Kuganolipava S, Sevenoaks T, Bower J, Kumar P, Hazell S, deSouza NM, Antoniou A, Bancroft E, Kote‐Jarai Z, Eeles R. The BARCODE1 Pilot: a feasibility study of using germline single nucleotide polymorphisms to target prostate cancer screening. BJU Int 2022; 129:325-336. [PMID: 34214236 PMCID: PMC9292247 DOI: 10.1111/bju.15535] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Revised: 05/09/2021] [Accepted: 06/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To assess the feasibility and uptake of a community-based prostate cancer (PCa) screening programme selecting men according to their genetic risk of PCa. To assess the uptake of PCa screening investigations by men invited for screening. The uptake of the pilot study would guide the opening of the larger BARCODE1 study recruiting 5000 men. SUBJECTS AND METHODS Healthy males aged 55-69 years were invited to participate via their general practitioners (GPs). Saliva samples were collected via mailed collection kits. After DNA extraction, genotyping was conducted using a study specific assay. Genetic risk was based on genotyping 130 germline PCa risk single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). A polygenic risk score (PRS) was calculated for each participant using the sum of weighted alleles for 130 SNPs. Study participants with a PRS lying above the 90th centile value were invited for PCa screening by prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biopsy. RESULTS Invitation letters were sent to 1434 men. The overall study uptake was 26% (375/1436) and 87% of responders were eligible for study entry. DNA genotyping data were available for 297 men and 25 were invited for screening. After exclusions due to medical comorbidity/invitations declined, 18 of 25 men (72%) underwent MRI and biopsy of the prostate. There were seven diagnoses of PCa (38.9%). All cancers were low-risk and were managed with active surveillance. CONCLUSION The BARCODE1 Pilot has shown this community study in the UK to be feasible, with an overall uptake of 26%. The main BARCODE1 study is now open and will recruit 5000 men. The results of BARCODE1 will be important in defining the role of genetic profiling in targeted PCa population screening. Patient Summary What is the paper about? Very few prostate cancer screening programmes currently exist anywhere in the world. Our pilot study investigated if men in the UK would find it acceptable to have a genetic test based on a saliva sample to examine their risk of prostate cancer development. This test would guide whether men are offered prostate cancer screening tests. What does it mean for patients? We found that the study design was acceptable: 26% of men invited to take part agreed to have the test. The majority of men who were found to have an increased genetic risk of prostate cancer underwent further tests offered (prostate MRI scan and biopsy). We have now expanded the study to enrol 5000 men. The BARCODE1 study will be important in examining whether this approach could be used for large-scale population prostate cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Benafif
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | | | - Eva McGrowder
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | | | - Mark N. Brook
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | - Sibel Saya
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
- The University of MelbourneMelbourneVictoriaAustralia
| | | | | | - Denzil James
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
| | | | - Natalie Taylor
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | - Matthew Hogben
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | - Barbara Benton
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | - Lucia D’Mello
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | - Kathryn Myhill
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Pardeep Kumar
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | - Steven Hazell
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | | | - Antonis Antoniou
- Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Elizabeth Bancroft
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| | | | - Rosalind Eeles
- Oncogenetics TeamInstitute of Cancer ResearchLondonUK
- Cancer Genetics Unit and Academic Urology UnitRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Fournier L, de Geus-Oei LF, Regge D, Oprea-Lager DE, D’Anastasi M, Bidaut L, Bäuerle T, Lopci E, Cappello G, Lecouvet F, Mayerhoefer M, Kunz WG, Verhoeff JJC, Caruso D, Smits M, Hoffmann RT, Gourtsoyianni S, Beets-Tan R, Neri E, deSouza NM, Deroose CM, Caramella C. Twenty Years On: RECIST as a Biomarker of Response in Solid Tumours an EORTC Imaging Group - ESOI Joint Paper. Front Oncol 2022; 11:800547. [PMID: 35083155 PMCID: PMC8784734 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.800547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2021] [Accepted: 11/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
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 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laure Fournier
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Université de Paris, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hopital europeen Georges Pompidou, Department of Radiology, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center (PARCC) Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMRS) 970, Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (INSERM), Paris, France
| | - Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
- Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Daniele Regge
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- Radiology Unit, Candiolo Cancer Institute, Fondazione del Piemonte per l’Oncologia-Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (FPO-IRCCS), Turin, Italy
| | - Daniela-Elena Oprea-Lager
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers [Vrije Universiteit (VU) University], Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Melvin D’Anastasi
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Medical Imaging Department, Mater Dei Hospital, University of Malta, Msida, Malta
| | - Luc Bidaut
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, United Kingdom
| | - Tobias Bäuerle
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Egesta Lopci
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine Unit, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) – Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Giovanni Cappello
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- Radiology Unit, Candiolo Cancer Institute, Fondazione del Piemonte per l’Oncologia-Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (FPO-IRCCS), Turin, Italy
| | - Frederic Lecouvet
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Marius Mayerhoefer
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Wolfgang G. Kunz
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU) Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Joost J. C. Verhoeff
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Damiano Caruso
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Marion Smits
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
- Brain Tumour Centre, Erasmus Medical Centre (MC) Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ralf-Thorsten Hoffmann
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital, Carl-Gustav-Carus Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Sofia Gourtsoyianni
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Areteion Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Regina Beets-Tan
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
- School For Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW) School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Emanuele Neri
- European Society of Oncologic Imaging (ESOI), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Department of Translational Research and of New Surgical and Medical Technologies, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, United States
| | - Christophe M. Deroose
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Katholieke Universiteit (KU) Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Caroline Caramella
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Radiology Department, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint Joseph Centre International des Cancers Thoraciques, Université Paris-Saclay, Le Plessis-Robinson, France
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Oprea-Lager DE, Cysouw MC, Boellaard R, Deroose CM, de Geus-Oei LF, Lopci E, Bidaut L, Herrmann K, Fournier LS, Bäuerle T, deSouza NM, Lecouvet FE. Bone Metastases Are Measurable: The Role of Whole-Body MRI and Positron Emission Tomography. Front Oncol 2021; 11:772530. [PMID: 34869009 PMCID: PMC8640187 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.772530] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2021] [Accepted: 11/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
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 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. 18F-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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela E. Oprea-Lager
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Matthijs C.F. Cysouw
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ronald Boellaard
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Christophe M. Deroose
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
- Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Egesta Lopci
- Nuclear Medicine Unit, IRCCS – Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Luc Bidaut
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, United Kingdom
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, and German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)-University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Laure S. Fournier
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Paris Cardiovascular Research Center (PARCC), Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Radiology Department, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hopital europeen Georges Pompidou, Université de Paris, Paris, France
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
| | - Tobias Bäuerle
- Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Frederic E. Lecouvet
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wormald B, Rodriguez-Manzano J, Moser N, Pennisi I, Ind TEJ, Vroobel K, Attygalle A, Georgiou P, deSouza NM. Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay for Detecting Tumor Markers and Human Papillomavirus: Accuracy and Supplemental Diagnostic Value to Endovaginal MRI in Cervical Cancer. Front Oncol 2021; 11:747614. [PMID: 34790573 PMCID: PMC8591099 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.747614] [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] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2021] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To establish the sensitivity and specificity of a human papillomavirus (HPV) and tumor marker DNA/mRNA assay for detecting cervical cancer that is transferrable to a Lab-on-a-chip platform and determine its diagnostic benefit in early stage disease when used in conjunction with high-resolution endovaginal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS Forty-one patients (27 with Stage1 cervical cancer [Group1] and 14 non-cancer HPV negative controls [Group2]) had DNA and RNA extracted from cervical cytology swab samples. HPV16, HPV18, hTERT, TERC/GAPDH and MYC/GAPDH concentration was established using a loop mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay. Thresholds for tumor marker detection for Group1 were set from Group2 analysis (any hTERT, TERC/GAPDH 3.12, MYC/GAPDH 0.155). Group 1 participants underwent endovaginal MRI. Sensitivity and specificity for cancer detection by LAMP and MRI individually and combined was documented by comparison to pathology. RESULTS Sensitivity and specificity for cancer detection was 68.8% and 77.8% if any tumor marker was positive regardless of HPV status (scenario1), and 93.8% and 55.8% if tumor marker or HPV were positive (scenario 2). Adding endovaginal MRI improved specificity to 88.9% in scenario 1 (sensitivity 68.8%) and to 77.8%% in scenario2 (sensitivity 93.8%). CONCLUSION Specificity for cervical cancer detection using a LAMP assay is superior with tumor markers; low sensitivity is improved by HPV detection. Accuracy for early stage cervical cancer detection is optimal using a spatially multiplexed tumor marker/HPV LAMP assay together with endovaginal MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin Wormald
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jesus Rodriguez-Manzano
- Department of Infectious Disease, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nicolas Moser
- Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ivana Pennisi
- Department of Infectious Disease, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Thomas E. J. Ind
- Departmentof Surgical Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Katherine Vroobel
- Department of Histopathology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ayoma Attygalle
- Department of Histopathology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Pantelis Georgiou
- Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
deSouza NM. Imaging to assist fertility-sparing surgery. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2021; 75:23-36. [PMID: 33722497 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2021.01.012] [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] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2020] [Accepted: 01/31/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Cytological screening and human papilloma virus testing has led to diagnosis of cervical cancer in young women at an earlier stage. Defining the full extent of the disease within the cervix with imaging aids the decision on feasibility of fertility-sparing surgical options, such as extended cone biopsy or trachelectomy. High spatial resolution images with maximal contrast between tumour and surrounding background are achieved with T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) obtained using an endovaginal receiver coil. Tumour size and volume demonstrated in this way correlates between observers and with histology and differences between MRI and histology estimates of normal endocervical canal length are not significant. For planning fertility-sparing surgery, this imaging technique facilitates the best oncological outcome while minimising subsequent obstetric risks. Parametrial invasion may be assessed on large field of view T2-weighted MRI. The fat content of the parametrium limits the utility of DW imaging in this context, because fat typically shows diffusion restriction. The use of contrast-enhanced MRI for assessing the parametrium does not provide additional benefits to the T2-weighted images and the need for an extrinsic contrast agent merely adds additional complexity and cost. For nodal assessment, 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computerised tomography (18FDG PET-CT) remains the gold standard.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 15 Cotswold Road, SM2 5NG, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Fournier L, Costaridou L, Bidaut L, Michoux N, Lecouvet FE, de Geus-Oei LF, Boellaard R, Oprea-Lager DE, Obuchowski NA, Caroli A, Kunz WG, Oei EH, O'Connor JPB, Mayerhoefer ME, Franca M, Alberich-Bayarri A, Deroose CM, Loewe C, Manniesing R, Caramella C, Lopci E, Lassau N, Persson A, Achten R, Rosendahl K, Clement O, Kotter E, Golay X, Smits M, Dewey M, Sullivan DC, van der Lugt A, deSouza NM, European Society Of Radiology. Incorporating radiomics into clinical trials: expert consensus endorsed by the European Society of Radiology on considerations for data-driven compared to biologically driven quantitative biomarkers. Eur Radiol 2021; 31:6001-6012. [PMID: 33492473 PMCID: PMC8270834 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07598-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2020] [Revised: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 12/03/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
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 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. KEY POINTS: • Data-driven processes like radiomics risk false discoveries due to high-dimensionality of the dataset compared to sample size, making adequate diversity of the data, cross-validation and external validation essential to mitigate the risks of spurious associations and overfitting. • Use of radiomic signatures within clinical trials requires multistep standardisation of image acquisition, image analysis and data mining processes. • Biological correlation may be established after clinical validation but is not mandatory.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laure Fournier
- PARCC, INSERM, Radiology Department, AP-HP, Hopital europeen Georges Pompidou, Université de Paris, F-75015, Paris, France
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Lena Costaridou
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- School of Medicine, University of Patras, University Campus, Rio, 26 500, Patras, Greece
| | - Luc Bidaut
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN6 7TS, UK
| | - Nicolas Michoux
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), B-1200, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Frederic E Lecouvet
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), B-1200, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald Boellaard
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (VU University), Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, USA
| | - Daniela E Oprea-Lager
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (VU University), Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nancy A Obuchowski
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, USA
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Anna Caroli
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Wolfgang G Kunz
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Edwin H Oei
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - James P B O'Connor
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Marius E Mayerhoefer
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Manuela Franca
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas de Abel Salazar, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Angel Alberich-Bayarri
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine (QUIBIM), Valencia, Spain
| | - Christophe M Deroose
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Christian Loewe
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Division of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, Dept. for Bioimaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Rashindra Manniesing
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Caroline Caramella
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Radiology Department, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Institut d'Oncologie Thoracique, Université Paris-Saclay, Le Plessis-Robinson, France
| | - Egesta Lopci
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital - IRCCS, Rozzano, MI, Italy
| | - Nathalie Lassau
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, USA
- Imaging Department, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus Grand, Paris, UMR 1281, INSERM, CNRS, CEA, Universite Paris-Saclay, Saint-Aubin, France
| | - Anders Persson
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Rik Achten
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Ghent University Hospital, Gent, Belgium
| | - Karen Rosendahl
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Olivier Clement
- PARCC, INSERM, Radiology Department, AP-HP, Hopital europeen Georges Pompidou, Université de Paris, F-75015, Paris, France
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
| | - Elmar Kotter
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Xavier Golay
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, USA
- Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Marion Smits
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc Dewey
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Daniel C Sullivan
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, USA
- Dept. of Radiology, Duke University, 311 Research Dr, Durham, NC, 27710, USA
| | - Aad van der Lugt
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- European Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (EIBALL), European Society of Radiology, Vienna, Austria.
- Imaging Group, European Organisation of Research and Treatment in Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium.
- Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance, Radiological Society of North America, Oak Brook, IL, USA.
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
O'Connell RL, Di Micco R, Khabra K, Wolf L, Elfadl D, deSouza NM, Roche N, Barry PA, Kirby AM, Rusby JE. Factors affecting volume and surface symmetry measured by three-dimensional surface imaging after breast-conserving therapy. Breast J 2021; 27:553-555. [PMID: 33723905 DOI: 10.1111/tbj.14218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2021] [Revised: 02/22/2021] [Accepted: 02/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel L O'Connell
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Rosa Di Micco
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
- Department ofClinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Komel Khabra
- Department of Statistics, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Lisa Wolf
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Dalia Elfadl
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
- Department of Breast Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Nicola Roche
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Peter A Barry
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
- Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Anna M Kirby
- Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- Department of Radiotherapy, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Jennifer E Rusby
- Department of Breast Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
- Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Winfield JM, Wakefield JC, Brenton JD, AbdulJabbar K, Savio A, Freeman S, Pace E, Lutchman-Singh K, Vroobel KM, Yuan Y, Banerjee S, Porta N, Ahmed Raza SE, deSouza NM. Biomarkers for site-specific response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in epithelial ovarian cancer: relating MRI changes to tumour cell load and necrosis. Br J Cancer 2021; 124:1130-1137. [PMID: 33398064 PMCID: PMC7961011 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-01217-5] [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] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2020] [Revised: 11/11/2020] [Accepted: 11/25/2020] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) potentially interrogates site-specific response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS Participants with newly diagnosed EOC due for platinum-based chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery were recruited prospectively in a multicentre study (n = 47 participants). Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and solid tumour volume (up to 10 lesions per participant) were obtained from DW-MRI before and after NAC (including double-baseline for repeatability assessment in n = 19). Anatomically matched lesions were analysed after surgical excision (65 lesions obtained from 25 participants). A trained algorithm determined tumour cell fraction, percentage tumour and percentage necrosis on histology. Whole-lesion post-NAC ADC and pre/post-NAC ADC changes were compared with histological metrics (residual tumour/necrosis) for each tumour site (ovarian, omental, peritoneal, lymph node). RESULTS Tumour volume reduced at all sites after NAC. ADC increased between pre- and post-NAC measurements. Post-NAC ADC correlated negatively with tumour cell fraction. Pre/post-NAC changes in ADC correlated positively with percentage necrosis. Significant correlations were driven by peritoneal lesions. CONCLUSIONS Following NAC in EOC, the ADC (measured using DW-MRI) increases differentially at disease sites despite similar tumour shrinkage, making its utility site-specific. After NAC, ADC correlates negatively with tumour cell fraction; change in ADC correlates positively with percentage necrosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01505829.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica M Winfield
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK
| | - Jennifer C Wakefield
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK
| | - James D Brenton
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK
- Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0XZ, UK
| | - Khalid AbdulJabbar
- Centre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Antonella Savio
- Department of Pathology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Fulham Road, London, SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Susan Freeman
- Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Erika Pace
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK
| | - Kerryn Lutchman-Singh
- Swansea Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Swansea Bay University Health Board, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, SA2 8QA, UK
| | - Katherine M Vroobel
- Department of Pathology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Fulham Road, London, SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - Yinyin Yuan
- Centre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Susana Banerjee
- Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK
| | - Nuria Porta
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Shan E Ahmed Raza
- Centre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
- Division of Molecular Pathology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
- Department of Computer Science, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London, SW7 3RP, UK.
- MRI Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Lam NFD, Rivens I, Giles SL, Harris E, deSouza NM, Ter Haar G. Quantitative prediction of the extent of pelvic tumour ablation by magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound. Int J Hyperthermia 2021; 38:1111-1125. [PMID: 34325608 DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1959658] [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] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2021] [Revised: 06/19/2021] [Accepted: 07/19/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient suitability for magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU) therapy of pelvic tumors is currently assessed by visual estimation of the proportion of tumor that can be reached by the device's focus (coverage). Since it is important to assess whether enough energy reaches the tumor to achieve ablation, a methodology for estimating the proportion of the tumor that can be ablated (treatability) was developed. Predicted treatability was compared against clinically achieved thermal ablation. METHODS MR Dixon sequence images of five patients with recurrent gynecological tumors were acquired during their treatment. Acousto-thermal simulations were performed using k-Wave for three exposure points (the deepest and shallowest reachable focal points within the tumor, identified from tumor coverage analysis, and a point halfway in-between) per patient. Interpolation between the resulting simulated ablated tissue volumes was used to estimate the maximum treatable depth and hence, tumor treatability. Predicted treatability was compared both to predicted tumor coverage and to the clinically treated tumor volume. The intended and simulated volumes and positions of ablated tissues were compared. RESULTS Predicted treatability was less than coverage by 52% (range: 31-78%) of the tumor volume. Predicted and clinical treatability differed by 9% (range: 1-25%) of tumor volume. Ablated tissue volume and position varied with beam path length through tissue. CONCLUSION Tumor coverage overestimated patient suitability for MRgHIFU therapy. Employing patient-specific simulations improved treatability assessment. Patient treatability assessment using simulations is feasible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ian Rivens
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Sharon L Giles
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Emma Harris
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Gail Ter Haar
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Imseeh G, Giles SL, Taylor A, Brown MRD, Rivens I, Gordon-Williams R, Ter Haar G, deSouza NM. Feasibility of palliating recurrent gynecological tumors with MRGHIFU: comparison of symptom, quality-of-life, and imaging response in intra and extra-pelvic disease. Int J Hyperthermia 2021; 38:623-632. [PMID: 33882792 DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1904154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2021] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 03/11/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To document longitudinal symptom, quality-of-life and imaging response in patients with recurrent gynecological tumors treated with magnetic resonance guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU), and compare changes in patients with intra- versus extra-pelvic lesions. METHODS Eleven symptomatic patients with painful recurrent gynecological tumors were treated with MRgHIFU (Profound Sonalleve) in a prospective single center study (NCT02714621). Pain scores, analgesic intake and quality-of-life metrics, whole tumor volume, and perfused tumor volume from Gadolinium-enhanced T1W imaging documented before and up to 90 days after treatment were compared between patients with intra- and extra-pelvic tumors. RESULTS Two of five patients with intra-pelvic and three of six patients with extra-pelvic tumors were classified as responders (>2 point reduction in NRS pain score without analgesia increase or a > 25% reduction in analgesic use). Cohort reductions in worst pain scores were not significant for either group. Emotional functioning for the whole cohort improved, although physical functioning did not. Ablative thermal temperatures were achieved in three patients with extra-pelvic tumors, but in none whose tumors were intra-pelvic. Pain response did not correlate with thermal dose. Tumor volume increased by 18% immediately post-treatment in the extra-pelvic but not in the intra-pelvic group. Ratio of perfused to whole lesion volume decreased by >20% by day 30 in extra-pelvic, but not intra-pelvic tumors although at day 30 both extra-pelvic and intra-pelvic tumors increased in volume. CONCLUSION MRgHIFU treatments can be delivered safely to patients with recurrent gynecological tumors. Extra-pelvic tumors responded better than intra-pelvic tumors and showed immediate swelling and reduction in perfused volume by day 30.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios Imseeh
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Sharon L Giles
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- MRI Unit, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Alexandra Taylor
- Department of Gynecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Matthew R D Brown
- Pain Medicine Department, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
- Targeted Approaches to Cancer Pain, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Ian Rivens
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | | | - Gail Ter Haar
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- MRI Unit, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
De Paepe KN, Higgins DM, Ball I, Morgan VA, Barton DP, deSouza NM. Visualizing the autonomic and somatic innervation of the female pelvis with 3D MR neurography: a feasibility study. Acta Radiol 2020; 61:1668-1676. [PMID: 32212832 PMCID: PMC7720358 DOI: 10.1177/0284185120909337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2019] [Accepted: 01/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment of female pelvic malignancies often causes pelvic nerve damage. Magnetic resonance (MR) neurography mapping the female pelvic innervation could aid in treatment planning. PURPOSE To depict female autonomic and somatic pelvic innervation using a modified 3D NerveVIEW sequence. MATERIAL AND METHODS Prospective study in 20 female volunteers (n = 6 normal, n = 14 cervical pathology) who underwent a modified 3D short TI inversion recovery (STIR) turbo spin-echo (TSE) scan with a motion-sensitive driven equilibrium (MSDE) preparation radiofrequency pulse and flow compensation. Modifications included offset independent trapezoid (OIT) pulses for inversion and MSDE refocusing. Maximum intensity projections (MIP) were evaluated by two observers (Observer 1, Observer 2); image quality was scored as 2 = high, 1 = medium, or 0 = low with the sciatic nerve serving as a reference. Conspicuity of autonomic superior (SHP) and bilateral inferior hypogastric plexuses (IHP), hypogastric nerves, and somatic pelvic nerves (sciatic, pudendal) was scored as 2 = well-defined, 1 = poorly defined, or 0 = not seen, and inter-observer agreement was determined. RESULTS Images were of medium to high quality according to both observers agreeing in 15/20 (75%) of individuals. SHP and bilateral hypogastric nerves were seen in 30/60 (50%) of cases by both observers. Bilateral IHP was seen in 85% (34/40) by Observer 1 and in 75% (30/40) by Observer 2. Sciatic nerves were well identified in all cases, while pudendal nerves were seen bilaterally by Observer 1 in 65% (26/40) and by Observer 2 in 72.5% (29/40). Agreement between observers for scoring nerve conspicuity was in the range of 60%-100%. CONCLUSION Modified 3D NerveVIEW renders high-quality images of the female autonomic and pudendal nerves.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katja N De Paepe
- The Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Sutton, UK
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Radiology, London, UK
| | | | | | - Veronica A Morgan
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Radiology, London, UK
| | - Desmond P Barton
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Gynecological Oncology, London, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- The Institute of Cancer Research, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Sutton, UK
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Radiology, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Kocher HM, Basu B, Froeling FEM, Sarker D, Slater S, Carlin D, deSouza NM, De Paepe KN, Goulart MR, Hughes C, Imrali A, Roberts R, Pawula M, Houghton R, Lawrence C, Yogeswaran Y, Mousa K, Coetzee C, Sasieni P, Prendergast A, Propper DJ. Phase I clinical trial repurposing all-trans retinoic acid as a stromal targeting agent for pancreatic cancer. Nat Commun 2020; 11:4841. [PMID: 32973176 PMCID: PMC7518421 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-18636-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 119] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2020] [Accepted: 09/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Pre-clinical models have shown that targeting pancreatic stellate cells with all-trans-retinoic-acid (ATRA) reprograms pancreatic stroma to suppress pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) growth. Here, in a phase Ib, dose escalation and expansion, trial for patients with advanced, unresectable PDAC (n = 27), ATRA is re-purposed as a stromal-targeting agent in combination with gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy using a two-step adaptive continual re-assessment method trial design. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D, primary outcome) is the FDA/EMEA approved dose of gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel along-with ATRA (45 mg/m2 orally, days 1-15/cycle). Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) is grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n = 2). Secondary outcomes show no detriment to ATRA pharmacokinetics.. Median overall survival for RP2D treated evaluable population, is 11.7 months (95%CI 8.6-15.7 m, n = 15, locally advanced (2) and metastatic (13)). Exploratory pharmacodynamics studies including changes in diffusion-weighted (DW)-MRI measured apparent diffusion coefficient after one cycle, and, modulation of cycle-specific serum pentraxin 3 levels over various cycles indicate stromal modulation. Baseline stromal-specific retinoid transport protein (FABP5, CRABP2) expression may be predicitve of response. Re-purposing ATRA as a stromal-targeting agent with gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel is safe and tolerable. This combination will be evaluated in a phase II randomized controlled trial for locally advanced PDAC. Clinical trial numbers: EudraCT: 2015-002662-23; NCT03307148. Trial acronym: STARPAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hemant M Kocher
- Centre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK.
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK.
- Barts and the London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, Whitechapel, London, E1 1FR, UK.
- Barts Pancreas Tissue Bank, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK.
| | - Bristi Basu
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge and Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust-Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Fieke E M Froeling
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London-Hammersmith Hospital, London, W12 0HS, UK
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1 Bungtown Road, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, 11724, USA
| | - Debashis Sarker
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, Guy's Hospital Campus, London, SE1 9RT, UK
| | - Sarah Slater
- Barts and the London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, Whitechapel, London, E1 1FR, UK
| | - Dominic Carlin
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Katja N De Paepe
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Michelle R Goulart
- Centre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Christine Hughes
- Centre for Tumour Biology, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Ahmet Imrali
- Barts Pancreas Tissue Bank, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Rhiannon Roberts
- Barts Pancreas Tissue Bank, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Maria Pawula
- PK/Bioanalytics Core Facility, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK
| | - Richard Houghton
- PK/Bioanalytics Core Facility, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Li Ka Shing Centre, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK
| | - Cheryl Lawrence
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Yathushan Yogeswaran
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Kelly Mousa
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Carike Coetzee
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Peter Sasieni
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
- School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, and King's Clinical Trials Unit, King's College London, London, SE1 9RT, UK
| | - Aaron Prendergast
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - David J Propper
- Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
- Barts and the London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, Whitechapel, London, E1 1FR, UK
- Centre for Cancer and Inflammation, Barts Cancer Institute-A CRUK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University London, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Pace E, MacKinnon AD, deSouza NM. Variation of the apparent diffusion coefficient of skull bone marrow by age group, pubertal status, and gender in a pediatric population. Acta Radiol 2020; 61:1240-1248. [PMID: 31865751 DOI: 10.1177/0284185119894217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Bone marrow composition varies with stage of development. PURPOSE To assess differences in apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) derived from clivus bone marrow in healthy children by age, pubertal status, and gender as a benchmark when monitoring local and systemic treatment-induced effects. MATERIAL AND METHODS Non-oncological pediatric patients (30 pre-pubertal [15 girls, 15 boys] and 30 post-pubertal [15 girls, 15 boys]) with previous normal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain including diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI; 1.5-T Philips Achieva-Ingenia, b-values 0 and 1000s/mm2) were studied. A 4-6 mm diameter region of interest (ROI), drawn within the clivus on two or three DW-MRI slices, yielded mean and centile ADC values. Pubertal status was recognized from imaging appearances of the pituitary gland and from fusion of the spheno-occipital synchondrosis. Correlations between ADC and age were assessed (Pearson's coefficient). Mann-Whitney U tests compared ADC by age, pubertal status, and gender. RESULTS Age and ADC were significantly negatively correlated (median ADC r=-0.48, mean ADC r=-0.42, P=0.0001 and 0.0008, respectively) which held true when divided by gender. Mean and median ADC differed significantly before and after puberty for the whole population (P=0.0001 and 0.0001, respectively). There was a left shift of the ADC histogram after puberty with significant differences in centile values. ADC differences before and after puberty remained when divided by gender (girls: P=0.04 and 0.009, respectively; boys: P=0.005 and 0.0002, respectively). CONCLUSION ADC of clivus bone marrow correlates with age in children. ADC decreases significantly after puberty, likely due to replacement of hypercellular marrow with fat. There are no gender-related differences in clivus bone-marrow ADC before or after puberty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika Pace
- CRUK Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- The Royal Marsden Hospital, Department of Radiology, Sutton, UK
| | - Andrew D MacKinnon
- The Royal Marsden Hospital, Department of Radiology, Sutton, UK
- Department of Neuroradiology, Atkinson Morley Regional Neuroscience Centre, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- CRUK Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK
- The Royal Marsden Hospital, Department of Radiology, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Chaw CL, deSouza NM, Khoo V, Suh YE, van As N. Clinical Outcomes of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy With Immediate Versus Delayed Hormone Therapy in Men With Oligometastatic Recurrence of Prostate Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:509-517. [PMID: 32423621 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.03.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2019] [Revised: 03/02/2020] [Accepted: 03/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
AIMS Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with the delayed option of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the current treatment paradigm in men relapsed with oligometastatic prostate cancer based on the outcome of a phase II randomised controlled study. The immediate (concomitant) use of ADT in this clinical setting potentially augments the efficacy of SBRT by improving systemic disease control. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of these two treatment strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eighty-eight patients with up to three oligometastases and controlled primary disease who had been treated using SBRT with immediate or delayed ADT were included in this retrospective analysis. Progression-free survival (PFS), widespread failure-free survival (WFFS) and freedom from further interventions (FFFI) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression methods. Toxicity was evaluated using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0. RESULTS Thirty-nine patients (44.3%) were treated with SBRT and immediate ADT (continuous ADT, n = 7; intermittent ADT, n = 32) and 49 (55.7%) with SBRT and delayed ADT. The median follow-up was 24 months (interquartile range 13.5-37.0 months). PFS in the immediate and delayed ADT groups were 26 months and 16 months, respectively (P < 0.007). The median WFFS in the immediate ADT group was not reached compared with 21 months in the delayed ADT group (P = 0.025). The 1- and 2-year FFFI in the immediate ADT group were 88% and 64.1%, respectively, significantly higher than those in the delayed ADT group (63.8% and 30.2%, respectively, P < 0.002). Acute toxicities of grade 1-2 occurred in 17.9% of the immediate ADT group and 18.4% of the delayed ADT group (P = 0.96). Only one case of grade 3 late toxicity (pelvic insufficiency) was identified in this study. CONCLUSIONS SBRT with concomitant ADT improves PFS, WFFS and FFFI as compared with SBRT with delayed ADT; this finding needs validation in a prospective, randomised study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C L Chaw
- Academic Unit of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Chelsea, London, UK.
| | - N M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - V Khoo
- Academic Unit of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Chelsea, London, UK; Radiotherapy and Imaging Division, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, London, UK
| | - Y E Suh
- Academic Unit of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Chelsea, London, UK; Radiotherapy and Imaging Division, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, London, UK
| | - N van As
- Academic Unit of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Chelsea, London, UK; Radiotherapy and Imaging Division, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Deroose CM, Lecouvet FE, Collette L, Oprea-Lager DE, Kunz WG, Bidaut L, Verhoeff JJC, Caramella C, Lopci E, Tombal B, de Geus-Oei LF, Fournier L, Smits M, deSouza NM. Impact of the COVID-19 crisis on imaging in oncological trials. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47:2054-2058. [PMID: 32533240 PMCID: PMC7289713 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-04910-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Christophe M Deroose
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium.
- Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
- Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - Frédéric E Lecouvet
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Laurence Collette
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Daniela E Oprea-Lager
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (VU University), Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wolfgang G Kunz
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Luc Bidaut
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- College of Science, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK
| | - Joost J C Verhoeff
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Caroline Caramella
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Radiology Department, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Institut d'Oncologie Thoracique, Université Paris-Saclay, Le Plessis-Robinson, France
| | - Egesta Lopci
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Nuclear Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital - IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Bertrand Tombal
- Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, Section of Nuclear Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Laure Fournier
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology, AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Marion Smits
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC - University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group, Brussels, Belgium
- Cancer Research UK Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust-Sutton, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Murray JR, Tree AC, Alexander EJ, Sohaib A, Hazell S, Thomas K, Gunapala R, Parker CC, Huddart RA, Gao A, Truelove L, McNair HA, Blasiak-Wal I, deSouza NM, Dearnaley D. Standard and Hypofractionated Dose Escalation to Intraprostatic Tumor Nodules in Localized Prostate Cancer: Efficacy and Toxicity in the DELINEATE Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 106:715-724. [PMID: 31812718 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.11.402] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2019] [Revised: 11/11/2019] [Accepted: 11/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report a planned analysis of the efficacy and toxicity of dose escalation to the intraprostatic dominant nodule identified on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging using standard and hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS DELINEATE is a single centre prospective phase 2 multicohort study including standard (cohort A: 74 Gy in 37 fractions) and moderately hypofractionated (cohort B: 60 Gy in 20 fractions) prostate image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy in patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network intermediate- and high-risk disease. Patients received an integrated boost of 82 Gy (cohort A) and 67 Gy (cohort B) to lesions visible on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Fifty-five patients were treated in cohort A, and 158 patients were treated in cohort B; the first 50 sequentially treated patients in cohort B were included in this planned analysis. The primary endpoint was late Radiation Therapy Oncology Group rectal toxicity at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included acute and late toxicity measured with clinician- and patient-reported outcomes at other time points and biochemical relapse-free survival for cohort A. Median follow-up was 74.5 months for cohort A and 52.0 months for cohort B. RESULTS In cohorts A and B, 27% and 40% of patients, respectively, were classified as having National Comprehensive Cancer Network high-risk disease. The cumulative 1-year incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 2 or worse rectal and urinary toxicity was 3.6% and 0% in cohort A and 8% and 10% in cohort B, respectively. There was no reported late grade 3 rectal toxicity in either cohort. Within cohort A, 4 of 55 (7%) patients had biochemical relapse. CONCLUSIONS Delivery of a simultaneous integrated boost to intraprostatic dominant nodules is feasible in prostate radiation therapy using standard and moderately hypofractionated regimens, with rectal and genitourinary toxicity comparable to contemporary series without an intraprostatic boost.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia R Murray
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom.
| | - Alison C Tree
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Aslam Sohaib
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Steve Hazell
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Karen Thomas
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ranga Gunapala
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Chris C Parker
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Robert A Huddart
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Annie Gao
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Lesley Truelove
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Helen A McNair
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Irena Blasiak-Wal
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - David Dearnaley
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Wormald BW, Doran SJ, Ind TE, D'Arcy J, Petts J, deSouza NM. Radiomic features of cervical cancer on T2-and diffusion-weighted MRI: Prognostic value in low-volume tumors suitable for trachelectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 156:107-114. [PMID: 31685232 PMCID: PMC7001101 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.10.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2019] [Revised: 10/07/2019] [Accepted: 10/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Textural features extracted from MRI potentially provide prognostic information additional to volume for influencing surgical management of cervical cancer. PURPOSE To identify textural features that differ between cervical tumors above and below the volume threshold of eligibility for trachelectomy and determine their value in predicting recurrence in patients with low-volume tumors. METHODS Of 378 patients with Stage1-2 cervical cancer imaged prospectively (3T, endovaginal coil), 125 had well-defined, histologically-confirmed squamous or adenocarcinomas with >100 voxels (>0.07 cm3) suitable for radiomic analysis. Regions-of-interest outlined the whole tumor on T2-W images and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps. Textural features based on grey-level co-occurrence matrices were compared (Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni correction) between tumors greater (n = 46) or less (n = 79) than 4.19 cm3. Clustering eliminated correlated variables. Significantly different features were used to predict recurrence (regression modelling) in surgically-treated patients with low-volume tumors and compared with a model using clinico-pathological features. RESULTS Textural features (Dissimilarity, Energy, ClusterProminence, ClusterShade, InverseVariance, Autocorrelation) in 6 of 10 clusters from T2-W and ADC data differed between high-volume (mean ± SD 15.3 ± 11.7 cm3) and low-volume (mean ± SD 1.3 ± 1.2 cm3) tumors. (p < 0.02). In low-volume tumors, predicting recurrence was indicated by: Dissimilarity, Energy (ADC-radiomics, AUC = 0.864); Dissimilarity, ClusterProminence, InverseVariance (T2-W-radiomics, AUC = 0.808); Volume, Depth of Invasion, LymphoVascular Space Invasion (clinico-pathological features, AUC = 0.794). Combining ADC-radiomic (but not T2-radiomic) and clinico-pathological features improved prediction of recurrence compared to the clinico-pathological model (AUC = 0.916, p = 0.006). Findings were supported by bootstrap re-sampling (n = 1000). CONCLUSION Textural features from ADC maps and T2-W images differ between high- and low-volume tumors and potentially predict recurrence in low-volume tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin W Wormald
- MRI Unit, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Simon J Doran
- MRI Unit, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Thomas Ej Ind
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; St George's University of London, Tooting, London, UK
| | - James D'Arcy
- MRI Unit, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - James Petts
- MRI Unit, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- MRI Unit, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Lam NFD, Rivens I, Giles SL, Harris E, deSouza NM, ter Haar G. Prediction of pelvic tumour coverage by magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU) from referral imaging. Int J Hyperthermia 2020; 37:1033-1045. [PMID: 32873089 PMCID: PMC8352374 DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2020.1812736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2019] [Revised: 08/13/2020] [Accepted: 08/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient suitability for magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU) ablation of pelvic tumors is initially evaluated clinically for treatment feasibility using referral images, acquired using standard supine diagnostic imaging, followed by MR screening of potential patients lying on the MRgHIFU couch in a 'best-guess' treatment position. Existing evaluation methods result in ≥40% of referred patients being screened out because of tumor non-targetability. We hypothesize that this process could be improved by development of a novel algorithm for predicting tumor coverage from referral imaging. METHODS The algorithm was developed from volunteer images and tested with patient data. MR images were acquired for five healthy volunteers and five patients with recurrent gynaecological cancer. Subjects were MR imaged supine and in oblique-supine-decubitus MRgHIFU treatment positions. Body outline and bones were segmented for all subjects, with organs-at-risk and tumors also segmented for patients. Supine images were aligned with treatment images to simulate a treatment dataset. Target coverage (of patient tumors and volunteer intra-pelvic soft tissue), i.e. the volume reachable by the MRgHIFU focus, was quantified. Target coverage predicted from supine imaging was compared to that from treatment imaging. RESULTS Mean (±standard deviation) absolute difference between supine-predicted and treatment-predicted coverage for 5 volunteers was 9 ± 6% (range: 2-22%) and for 4 patients, was 12 ± 7% (range: 4-21%), excluding a patient with poor acoustic coupling (coverage difference was 53%). CONCLUSION Prediction of MRgHIFU target coverage from referral imaging appears feasible, facilitating further development of automated evaluation of patient suitability for MRgHIFU.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ian Rivens
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Sharon L. Giles
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Emma Harris
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Gail ter Haar
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Guckenberger M, Lievens Y, Bouma AB, Collette L, Dekker A, deSouza NM, Dingemans AMC, Fournier B, Hurkmans C, Lecouvet FE, Meattini I, Méndez Romero A, Ricardi U, Russell NS, Schanne DH, Scorsetti M, Tombal B, Verellen D, Verfaillie C, Ost P. Characterisation and classification of oligometastatic disease: a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer consensus recommendation. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21:e18-e28. [PMID: 31908301 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30718-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 510] [Impact Index Per Article: 127.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2019] [Revised: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 10/15/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Oligometastatic disease has been proposed as an intermediate state between localised and systemically metastasised disease. In the absence of randomised phase 3 trials, early clinical studies show improved survival when radical local therapy is added to standard systemic therapy for oligometastatic disease. However, since no biomarker for the identification of patients with true oligometastatic disease is clinically available, the diagnosis of oligometastatic disease is based solely on imaging findings. A small number of metastases on imaging could represent different clinical scenarios, which are associated with different prognoses and might require different treatment strategies. 20 international experts including 19 members of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer OligoCare project developed a comprehensive system for characterisation and classification of oligometastatic disease. We first did a systematic review of the literature to identify inclusion and exclusion criteria of prospective interventional oligometastatic disease clinical trials. Next, we used a Delphi consensus process to select a total of 17 oligometastatic disease characterisation factors that should be assessed in all patients treated with radical local therapy for oligometastatic disease, both within and outside of clinical trials. Using a second round of the Delphi method, we established a decision tree for oligometastatic disease classification together with a nomenclature. We agreed oligometastatic disease as the overall umbrella term. A history of polymetastatic disease before diagnosis of oligometastatic disease was used as the criterion to differentiate between induced oligometastatic disease (previous history of polymetastatic disease) and genuine oligometastatic disease (no history of polymetastatic disease). We further subclassified genuine oligometastatic disease into repeat oligometastatic disease (previous history of oligometastatic disease) and de-novo oligometastatic disease (first time diagnosis of oligometastatic disease). In de-novo oligometastatic disease, we differentiated between synchronous and metachronous oligometastatic disease. We did a final subclassification into oligorecurrence, oligoprogression, and oligopersistence, considering whether oligometastatic disease is diagnosed during a treatment-free interval or during active systemic therapy and whether or not an oligometastatic lesion is progressing on current imaging. This oligometastatic disease classification and nomenclature needs to be prospectively evaluated by the OligoCare study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Yolande Lievens
- Department for Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Angelique B Bouma
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Laurence Collette
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Andre Dekker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Anne-Marie C Dingemans
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Beatrice Fournier
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Coen Hurkmans
- Department of Radiotherapy, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Frédéric E Lecouvet
- Radiology Department, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Icro Meattini
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Alejandra Méndez Romero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Nicola S Russell
- Division of Radiotherapy, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Daniel H Schanne
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Milan, Italy
| | - Bertrand Tombal
- Department of Urology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Dirk Verellen
- Iridium Kankernetwerk and University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Antwerp, Belgium
| | | | - Piet Ost
- Department for Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital and Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Winfield JM, Wakefield JC, Dolling D, Hall M, Freeman S, Brenton JD, Lutchman-Singh K, Pace E, Priest AN, Quest RA, Taylor NJ, Gabra H, McKnight L, Collins DJ, Banerjee S, Hall E, deSouza NM. Diffusion-weighted MRI in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Apparent Diffusion Coefficient as a Response Marker. Radiology 2019; 293:374-383. [PMID: 31573402 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019190545] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Background Treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer results in a relapse rate of 75%. Early markers of response would enable optimization of management and improved outcome in both primary and recurrent disease. Purpose To assess the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), derived from diffusion-weighted MRI, as an indicator of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter trial (from 2012-2016) recruited participants with stage III or IV ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer (newly diagnosed, cohort one; relapsed, cohort two) scheduled for platinum-based chemotherapy, with interval debulking surgery in cohort one. Cohort one underwent two baseline MRI examinations separated by 0-7 days to assess ADC repeatability; an additional MRI was performed after three treatment cycles. Cohort two underwent imaging at baseline and after one and three treatment cycles. ADC changes in responders and nonresponders were compared (Wilcoxon rank sum tests). PFS and overall survival were assessed by using a multivariable Cox model. Results A total of 125 participants (median age, 63.3 years [interquartile range, 57.0-70.7 years]; 125 women; cohort one, n = 47; cohort two, n = 78) were included. Baseline ADC (range, 77-258 × 10-5mm2s-1) was repeatable (upper and lower 95% limits of agreement of 12 × 10-5mm2s-1 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 6 × 10-5mm2s-1 to 18 × 10-5mm2s-1] and -15 × 10-5mm2s-1 [95% CI: -21 × 10-5mm2s-1 to -9 × 10-5mm2s-1]). ADC increased in 47% of cohort two after one treatment cycle, and in 58% and 53% of cohorts one and two, respectively, after three cycles. Percentage change from baseline differed between responders and nonresponders after three cycles (16.6% vs 3.9%; P = .02 [biochemical response definition]; 19.0% vs 6.2%; P = .04 [radiologic definition]). ADC increase after one cycle was associated with longer PFS in cohort two (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.98; P = .03). ADC change was not indicative of overall survival for either cohort. Conclusion After three cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) changes are indicative of response. After one treatment cycle, increased ADC is indicative of improved progression-free survival in relapsed disease. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica M Winfield
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Jennifer C Wakefield
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - David Dolling
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Marcia Hall
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Susan Freeman
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - James D Brenton
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Kerryn Lutchman-Singh
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Erika Pace
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Andrew N Priest
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Rebecca A Quest
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - N Jane Taylor
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Hani Gabra
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Liam McKnight
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - David J Collins
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Susana Banerjee
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Emma Hall
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- From the Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiation Therapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); MRI Unit, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton SM2 5PT, England (J.M.W., J.C.W., E.P., D.J.C., N.M.d.S.); Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, England (D.D., E.H.); Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (M.H.); Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, England (S.F., A.N.P.); Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England (J.D.B.); Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (K.L.S.); Imaging Department, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, England (R.A.Q.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, England (N.J.T.); Imperial College London Hammersmith Campus, London, England (H.G.); Clinical Discovery Unit, Early Clinical Development, IMED Biotech Unit, Astrazeneca, Cambridge, England (H.G.); Department of Radiology, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg Health Board, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, Wales (L.M.); and Gynaecology Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, England (S.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Giles SL, Brown MRD, Rivens I, Deppe M, Huisman M, Kim YS, Farquhar-Smith P, Williams JE, Ter Haar GR, deSouza NM. Comparison of Imaging Changes and Pain Responses in Patients with Intra- or Extraosseous Bone Metastases Treated Palliatively with Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity-Focused Ultrasound. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 30:1351-1360.e1. [PMID: 31101417 PMCID: PMC6715806 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.02.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2018] [Revised: 02/07/2019] [Accepted: 02/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study compared changes in imaging and in pain relief between patients with intraosseous, as opposed to extraosseous bone metastases. Both groups were treated palliatively with magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity-focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU). MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 21 patients were treated prospectively with MRgHIFU at 3 centers. Intraprocedural thermal changes measured using proton resonance frequency shift (PRFS) thermometry and gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted (Gd-T1W) image appearances after treatment were compared for intra- and extraosseous metastases. Pain scores and use of analgesic therapy documented before and up to 90 days after treatment were used to classify responses and were compared between the intra- and extraosseous groups. Gd-T1W changes were compared between responders and nonresponders in each group. RESULTS Thermal dose volumes were significantly larger in the extraosseous group (P = 0.039). Tumor diameter did not change after treatment in either group. At day 30, Gd-T1W images showed focal nonenhancement in 7 of 9 patients with intraosseous tumors; in patients with extraosseous tumors, changes were heterogeneous. Cohort reductions in worst-pain scores were seen for both groups, but differences from baseline at days 14, 30, 60, and 90 were only significant for the intraosseous group (P = 0.027, P = 0.013, P = 0.012, and P = 0.027, respectively). By day 30, 67% of patients (6 of 9) with intraosseous tumors were classified as responders, and the rate was 33% (4 of 12) for patients with extraosseous tumors. In neither group was pain response indicated by nonenhancement on Gd-T1W. CONCLUSIONS Intraosseous tumors showed focal nonenhancement by day 30, and patients had better pain response to MRgHIFU than those with extraosseous tumors. In this small cohort, post-treatment imaging was not informative of treatment efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sharon L Giles
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Unit, The Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom.
| | - Matthew R D Brown
- Pain Medicine Department, The Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom; Targeted Approaches to Cancer Pain, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ian Rivens
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Merel Huisman
- Image Sciences Institute/Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Young-Sun Kim
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea; Department of Radiology, Mint Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Paul Farquhar-Smith
- Pain Medicine Department, The Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| | - John E Williams
- Pain Medicine Department, The Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| | - Gail R Ter Haar
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Unit, The Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Weller A, Dunlop A, Oxer A, Gunapala R, Murray I, Gray MJ, Flux GD, deSouza NM, Ahmed M. Spect perfusion imaging versus CT for predicting radiation injury to normal lung in lung cancer patients. Br J Radiol 2019; 92:20190184. [PMID: 31287737 PMCID: PMC6732923 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2019] [Revised: 05/07/2019] [Accepted: 06/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, to establish whether the fractional volumes of irradiated anatomic or perfused lung differed between those with and without deteriorating lung function or radiation associated lung injury (RALI). METHODS 48 patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for NSCLC had a radiotherapy-planning CT scan and single photon emission CT lung perfusion imaging (99mTc-labelled macroaggregate albumin). CT defined the anatomic and the single photon emission CT scan (co-registered with CT) identified the perfused (threshold 20 % of maximum) lung volumes. Fractional volumes of anatomic and perfused lung receiving more than 5, 10, 13, 20, 30, 40, 50 Gy were compared between patients with deteriorating (>median decline) vs stable ( RESULTS Fractional volumes of anatomic and perfused lung receiving more than 10, 13 and 20 Gy were significantly higher in patients with deteriorating vs stable FEV1 ( p = 0.005, 0.005 and 0.025 respectively) but did not differ for higher doses of radiation (>30, 40, 50 Gy). Fractional volumes of anatomic and perfused lung receiving > 10 Gy best predicted decline in FEV1 (Area under receiver operating characteristic curve (Az = 0.77 and 0.76 respectively); sensitivity/specificity 75%/81 and 80%/71%) for a 32.7% anatomic and 33.5% perfused volume cut-off. Irradiating an anatomic fractional volume of 4.7% to > 50 Gy had a sensitivity/specificity of 83%/89 % for indicating RALI (Az = 0.83). CONCLUSION A 10-20 Gy radiation dose to anatomic or perfused lung results in decline in FEV1. A fractional anatomic volume of >5% receiving >50 Gy influences development of RALI. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Extent of low-dose radiation to normal lung influences functional respiratory decline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alex Dunlop
- The Joint Department of Physics, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Adam Oxer
- The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Ranga Gunapala
- The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Iain Murray
- The Joint Department of Physics, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Matthew J Gray
- The Joint Department of Physics, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Glenn D Flux
- The Joint Department of Physics, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey
| | - Merina Ahmed
- The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
deSouza NM, Achten E, Alberich-Bayarri A, Bamberg F, Boellaard R, Clément O, Fournier L, Gallagher F, Golay X, Heussel CP, Jackson EF, Manniesing R, Mayerhofer ME, Neri E, O'Connor J, Oguz KK, Persson A, Smits M, van Beek EJR, Zech CJ. Validated imaging biomarkers as decision-making tools in clinical trials and routine practice: current status and recommendations from the EIBALL* subcommittee of the European Society of Radiology (ESR). Insights Imaging 2019; 10:87. [PMID: 31468205 PMCID: PMC6715762 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-019-0764-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2019] [Accepted: 06/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Observer-driven pattern recognition is the standard for interpretation of medical images. To achieve global parity in interpretation, semi-quantitative scoring systems have been developed based on observer assessments; these are widely used in scoring coronary artery disease, the arthritides and neurological conditions and for indicating the likelihood of malignancy. However, in an era of machine learning and artificial intelligence, it is increasingly desirable that we extract quantitative biomarkers from medical images that inform on disease detection, characterisation, monitoring and assessment of response to treatment. Quantitation has the potential to provide objective decision-support tools in the management pathway of patients. Despite this, the quantitative potential of imaging remains under-exploited because of variability of the measurement, lack of harmonised systems for data acquisition and analysis, and crucially, a paucity of evidence on how such quantitation potentially affects clinical decision-making and patient outcome. This article reviews the current evidence for the use of semi-quantitative and quantitative biomarkers in clinical settings at various stages of the disease pathway including diagnosis, staging and prognosis, as well as predicting and detecting treatment response. It critically appraises current practice and sets out recommendations for using imaging objectively to drive patient management decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden Hospital, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5PT, UK.
| | | | | | - Fabian Bamberg
- Department of Radiology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Claus Peter Heussel
- Universitätsklinik Heidelberg, Translational Lung Research Center (TLRC), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 156, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Edward F Jackson
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Rashindra Manniesing
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Emanuele Neri
- Department of Translational Research, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - James O'Connor
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | | | - Marion Smits
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine (Ne-515), Erasmus MC, PO Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Edwin J R van Beek
- Edinburgh Imaging, Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh Bioquarter, 47 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Christoph J Zech
- University Hospital Basel, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Basel, Petersgraben 4, CH-4031, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Carlin D, Orton MR, Collins D, deSouza NM. Probing structure of normal and malignant prostate tissue before and after radiation therapy with luminal water fraction and diffusion-weighted MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019; 50:619-627. [PMID: 30589150 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2018] [Revised: 11/14/2018] [Accepted: 11/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Interpretation of diffusion in conjunction with T2 -weighted MRI is essential for assessing prostate cancer; however, the combination of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) with quantitative T2 mapping remains unexplored. PURPOSE To document the T2 components and ADC of untreated and irradiated nonmalignant prostate tissue as a measure of their glandular luminal and cellular compartments and to compare values with those of tumor. STUDY TYPE Prospective. POPULATION Twenty-four men with prostate cancer (14 untreated; 10 with biochemical recurrence following radiation therapy). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES Endorectal 3 T MRI including a 32-echo gradient echo and spin echo (GRASE) and an 8 b-value diffusion-weighted sequence. ASSESSMENT Regions of interest were drawn on ADC maps and T2 -weighted images around focal lesions in areas of biopsy-positive prostate cancer and in nonmalignant areas of untreated and irradiated peripheral zone (PZ), and untreated transitional zone (TZ). Multiecho T2 data were fitted with mono-/biexponential decay and nonnegative least squares functions. The luminal water fraction (LWF) was derived. STATISTICAL TESTS The preference between mono- and biexponential decay was assessed using the Bayesian information criterion. Differences in fitted parameters between tissue types were compared (paired t-test within groups, Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon rank-sum test between groups) and correlations between ADC and T2 components assessed (Spearman rank correlation test). RESULTS LWF in tumor (0.09) was significantly lower than in PZ or TZ (0.27 and 0.18, P < 0.01, respectively), but tumor values were comparable to nonmalignant irradiated prostate (0.08). The short T2 relaxation rate was lower in tumor than in nonmalignant untreated or irradiated tissue (significant compared with TZ, P = 0.01). There was a strong correlation between LWF and ADC in normal untreated tissue (r = 0.88, P < 0.001). This relationship was absent in nonmalignant irradiated prostrate (r = -0.35, P = 0.42) and in tumor (r = -0.04, P = 0.88). DATA CONCLUSION T2 components in conjunction with ADC can be used to characterize untreated and irradiated nonmalignant prostate and tumor. LWF is most useful at discriminating tumor in the untreated prostate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:619-627.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominic Carlin
- CRUK Imaging Centre, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, UK
| | | | - David Collins
- CRUK Imaging Centre, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- CRUK Imaging Centre, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey, UK
- Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey, UK
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Giles SL, Imseeh G, Rivens I, ter Haar GR, Taylor A, deSouza NM. MR guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU) for treating recurrent gynaecological tumours: a pilot feasibility study. Br J Radiol 2019; 92:20181037. [PMID: 31084495 PMCID: PMC6592075 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20181037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2018] [Revised: 03/07/2019] [Accepted: 04/01/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the feasibility of targeting recurrent gynaecological tumours with MR guided high intensity focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU). METHODS 20 patients with recurrent gynaecological tumours were prospectively scanned on a Philips/Profound 3 T Achieva MR/ Sonalleve HIFU system. Gross tumour volume (GTV) and planning target volume (PTV) were delineated on T 2W and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Achievable treatment volumes that (i) assumed bowel and/or urogenital tract preparation could be used to reduce risk of damage to organs-at-risk (TVoptimal), or (ii) assumed no preparations were possible (TVno-prep) were compared with PTV on virtual treatment plans. Patients were considered treatable if TVoptimal ≥ 50 % PTV. RESULTS 11/20 patients (55%) were treatable if preparation strategies were used: nine had central pelvic recurrences, two had tumours in metastatic locations. Treatable volume ranged from 3.4 to 90.3 ml, representing 70 ± 17 % of PTVs. Without preparation, 6/20 (30%) patients were treatable (four central recurrences, two metastatic lesions). Limiting factors were disease beyond reach of the HIFU transducer, and bone obstructing tumour access. DWI assisted tumour outlining, but differences from T 2W imaging in GTV size (16.9 ± 23.0%) and PTV location (3.8 ± 2.8 mm in phase-encode direction) limited its use for treatment planning. CONCLUSIONS Despite variation in size and location within the pelvis, ≥ 50 % of tumour volumes were considered targetable in 55 % patients while avoiding adjacent critical structures. A prospective treatment study will assess safety and symptom relief in a second patient cohort. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Target size, location and access make MRgHIFU a viable treatment modality for treating symptomatic recurrent gynaecological tumours within the pelvis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sharon L Giles
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Imseeh
- Department of Gynae-Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ian Rivens
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gail R ter Haar
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alexandra Taylor
- Department of Gynae-Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- The CRUK Cancer Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Winfield JM, Miah AB, Strauss D, Thway K, Collins DJ, deSouza NM, Leach MO, Morgan VA, Giles SL, Moskovic E, Hayes A, Smith M, Zaidi SH, Henderson D, Messiou C. Utility of Multi-Parametric Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Characterization and Radiotherapy Response Assessment in Soft-Tissue Sarcomas and Correlation With Histopathology. Front Oncol 2019; 9:280. [PMID: 31106141 PMCID: PMC6494941 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2019] [Accepted: 03/27/2019] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate repeatability of quantitative multi-parametric MRI in retroperitoneal sarcomas, assess parameter changes with radiotherapy, and correlate pre-operative values with histopathological findings in the surgical specimens. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma were imaged at baseline, of whom 27 also underwent a second baseline examination for repeatability assessment. 14/30 patients were treated with pre-operative radiotherapy and were imaged again after completing radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 daily fractions, over 5.5 weeks). The following parameter estimates were assessed in the whole tumor volume at baseline and following radiotherapy: apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), parameters of the intra-voxel incoherent motion model of diffusion-weighted MRI (D, f, D*), transverse relaxation rate, fat fraction, and enhancing fraction after gadolinium-based contrast injection. Correlation was evaluated between pre-operative quantitative parameters and histopathological assessments of cellularity and fat fraction in post-surgical specimens (ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT01902667). Results: Upper and lower 95% limits of agreement were 7.1 and -6.6%, respectively for median ADC at baseline. Median ADC increased significantly post-radiotherapy. Pre-operative ADC and D were negatively correlated with cellularity (r = -0.42, p = 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.22 to -0.59 for ADC; r = -0.45, p = 0.005, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.62 for D), and fat fraction from Dixon MRI showed strong correlation with histopathological assessment of fat fraction (r = 0.79, p = 10-7, 95% CI 0.69-0.86). Conclusion: Fat fraction on MRI corresponded to fat content on histology and therefore contributes to lesion characterization. Measurement repeatability was excellent for ADC; this parameter increased significantly post-radiotherapy even in disease categorized as stable by size criteria, and corresponded to cellularity on histology. ADC can be utilized for characterizing and assessing response in heterogeneous retroperitoneal sarcomas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica M. Winfield
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Aisha B. Miah
- Sarcoma Unit, Department of Radiotherapy and Physics, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Dirk Strauss
- Department of Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Khin Thway
- Sarcoma Unit, Department of Radiotherapy and Physics, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Histopathology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - David J. Collins
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Martin O. Leach
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Veronica A. Morgan
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Sharon L. Giles
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Eleanor Moskovic
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Andrew Hayes
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Myles Smith
- Department of Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Shane H. Zaidi
- Sarcoma Unit, Department of Radiotherapy and Physics, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel Henderson
- Sarcoma Unit, Department of Radiotherapy and Physics, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Christina Messiou
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
deSouza NM, Tempany CM. A risk-based approach to identifying oligometastatic disease on imaging. Int J Cancer 2018; 144:422-430. [PMID: 30098215 PMCID: PMC6492106 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31793] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [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: 05/02/2018] [Revised: 06/27/2018] [Accepted: 07/31/2018] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Recognition of <3 metastases in <2 organs, particularly in cancers with a known predisposition to oligometastatic disease (OMD) (colorectal, prostate, renal, sarcoma and lung), offers the opportunity to focally treat the lesions identified and confers a survival advantage. The reliability with which OMD is identified depends on the sensitivity of the imaging technique used for detection and may be predicted from phenotypic and genetic factors of the primary tumour, which determine metastatic risk. Whole‐body or organ‐specific imaging to identify oligometastases requires optimization to achieve maximal sensitivity. Metastatic lesions at multiple locations may require a variety of imaging modalities for best visualisation because the optimal image contrast is determined by tumour biology. Newer imaging techniques used for this purpose require validation. Additionally, rationalisation of imaging strategies is needed, particularly with regard to timing of imaging and follow‐up studies. This article reviews the current evidence for the use of imaging for recognising OMD and proposes a risk‐based roadmap for identifying patients with true OMD, or at risk of metastatic disease likely to be OM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Imaging Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Clare M Tempany
- Department of Radiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Kousi E, O'Flynn EAM, Borri M, Morgan VA, deSouza NM, Schmidt MA. Pre-treatment functional MRI of breast cancer: T2* evaluation at 3 T and relationship to dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2018; 52:53-61. [PMID: 29859948 DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2018.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2018] [Revised: 05/30/2018] [Accepted: 05/30/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Baseline T2* relaxation time has been proposed as an imaging biomarker in cancer, in addition to Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced (DCE) MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) parameters. The purpose of the current work is to investigate sources of error in T2* measurements and the relationship between T2* and DCE and DWI functional parameters in breast cancer. METHODS Five female volunteers and thirty-two women with biopsy proven breast cancer were scanned at 3 T, with Research Ethics Committee approval. T2* values of the normal breast were acquired from high-resolution, low-resolution and fat-suppressed gradient-echo sequences in volunteers, and compared. In breast cancer patients, pre-treatment T2*, DCE MRI and DWI were performed at baseline. Pathologically complete responders at surgery and non-responders were identified and compared. Principal component analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA) were performed. RESULTS There were no significant differences between T2* values from high-resolution, low-resolution and fat-suppressed datasets (p > 0.05). There were not significant differences between baseline functional parameters in responders and non-responders (p > 0.05). However, there were differences in the relationship between T2* and contrast-agent uptake in responders and non-responders. Voxels of similar characteristics were grouped in 5 clusters, and large intra-tumoural variations of all parameters were demonstrated. CONCLUSION Breast T2* measurements at 3 T are robust, but spatial resolution should be carefully considered. T2* of breast tumours at baseline is unrelated to DCE and DWI parameters and contribute towards describing functional heterogeneity of breast tumours.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Evanthia Kousi
- CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom.
| | - Elizabeth A M O'Flynn
- CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| | - Marco Borri
- CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| | - Veronica A Morgan
- CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| | - Maria A Schmidt
- CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Alvarez RM, Biliatis I, Rockall A, Papadakou E, Sohaib SA, deSouza NM, Butler J, Nobbenhuis M, Barton D, Shepherd JH, Ind T. MRI measurement of residual cervical length after radical trachelectomy for cervical cancer and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes: a blinded imaging analysis. BJOG 2018; 125:1726-1733. [PMID: 30099822 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [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: 07/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the association between the residual cervix measured on postoperative MRI after radical vaginal trachelectomy (RVT) and adverse obstetrical outcomes. DESIGN Observational study. SETTING Referral Cancer centre. POPULATION Women who conceived after RVT for cervical cancer at the Royal Marsden Hospital, London, between 1995 and 2015. METHODS Postoperative MRI scans were analysed by three researchers. The agreement between researchers was assessed by Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plot. Patients were divided into two groups (<10 and ≥10 mm residual cervix) for the analysis of adverse obstetrical outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Late miscarriage, premature delivery, premature rupture of membranes (PROM) and chorioamnionitis. RESULTS Thirty-one MRI scans were available; 29 of these women had a pregnancy that progressed beyond the first trimester. There was a strong reproducibility of the measurement of residual cervix (P < 0.001). Nineteen women (65.5%) had <10 mm residual cervix and 10 (34.5%) had ≥10 mm. Among women with <10 mm residual cervix, seven (36.8%) experienced PROM and ten (66.7%) had a preterm birth; No women with ≥10 mm residual cervix had PROM and two (22.2%) had a preterm birth (P = 0.028 and P = 0.035, respectively). Overall, there were nine (16.7%) first-trimester miscarriages, six (11.1%) late fetal losses, 12 (31.6%) preterm births and 36 (66.7%) live births. After a mean follow up of 78.1 months, 36 women were disease-free and one woman had died. CONCLUSIONS MRI measurements of the residual cervix are reproducible between observers. The incidence of PROM and premature delivery is higher when the residual cervix after RVT is <10 mm. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT The risk of prematurity after RVT can be predicted from measurements of residual cervical length on postoperative MRI scan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R M Alvarez
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.,Department of Gynaecology and Gynaecological Oncology, Santa Cristina University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
| | - I Biliatis
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - A Rockall
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - E Papadakou
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - S A Sohaib
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - N M deSouza
- Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - J Butler
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - M Nobbenhuis
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Djp Barton
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.,St George's University of London, London, UK
| | - J H Shepherd
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Tej Ind
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.,St George's University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Affiliation(s)
- Nandita M deSouza
- From the MRI Unit, Cancer Research UK Imaging Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, England
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Papaevangelou E, Almeida GS, Box C, deSouza NM, Chung Y. The effect of FASN inhibition on the growth and metabolism of a cisplatin-resistant ovarian carcinoma model. Int J Cancer 2018; 143:992-1002. [PMID: 29569717 PMCID: PMC6055739 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.31392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2017] [Revised: 02/02/2018] [Accepted: 02/28/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Overexpression of fatty acid synthase (FASN), a key regulator of the de novo synthesis of fatty acids, has been demonstrated in a variety of cancers and is associated with poor prognosis and increased multidrug resistance. Inhibition of FASN with the anti-obesity drug orlistat has been shown to have significant anti-tumourigenic effects in many cancers, notably breast and prostate. In our study, we investigated whether FASN inhibition using orlistat is an effective adjunctive treatment for ovarian cancers that have become platinum resistant using a cisplatin-resistant ovarian tumour xenograft model in mice. Mice were treated with orlistat or cisplatin or a combination and metabolite analysis and histopathology were performed on the tumours ex vivo. Orlistat decreased tumour fatty acid metabolism by inhibiting FASN, cisplatin reduced fatty acid β-oxidation, and combination treatment delayed tumour growth and induced apoptotic and necrotic cell death in cisplatin-resistant ovarian cancer cells over and above that with either treatment alone. Combination treatment also decreased glutamine metabolism, nucleotide and glutathione biosynthesis and fatty acid β-oxidation. Our data suggest that orlistat chemosensitised platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to treatment with platinum and resulted in enhanced efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Efthymia Papaevangelou
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and ImagingThe Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, BelmontSuttonSurreyUnited Kingdom
| | - Gilberto S. Almeida
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and ImagingThe Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, BelmontSuttonSurreyUnited Kingdom
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial Centre for Translational & Experimental Medicine (ICTEM)Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital CampusLondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Carol Box
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and ImagingThe Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, BelmontSuttonSurreyUnited Kingdom
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and ImagingThe Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, BelmontSuttonSurreyUnited Kingdom
| | - Yuen‐Li Chung
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and ImagingThe Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, BelmontSuttonSurreyUnited Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Ranger A, Dunlop A, Hutchinson K, Convery H, Maclennan MK, Chantler H, Twyman N, Rose C, McQuaid D, Amos RA, Griffin C, deSouza NM, Donovan E, Harris E, Coles CE, Kirby A. A Dosimetric Comparison of Breast Radiotherapy Techniques to Treat Locoregional Lymph Nodes Including the Internal Mammary Chain. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2018; 30:346-353. [PMID: 29483041 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2018.01.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2017] [Revised: 01/02/2018] [Accepted: 01/03/2018] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
Abstract
AIMS Radiotherapy target volumes in early breast cancer treatment increasingly include the internal mammary chain (IMC). In order to maximise survival benefits of IMC radiotherapy, doses to the heart and lung should be minimised. This dosimetry study compared the ability of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, arc therapy and proton beam therapy (PBT) techniques with and without breath-hold to achieve target volume constraints while minimising dose to organs at risk (OARs). MATERIALS AND METHODS In 14 patients' datasets, seven IMC radiotherapy techniques were compared: wide tangent (WT) three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and PBT, each in voluntary deep inspiratory breath-hold (vDIBH) and free breathing (FB), and tomotherapy in FB only. Target volume coverage and OAR doses were measured for each technique. These were compared using a one-way ANOVA with all pairwise comparisons tested using Bonferroni's multiple comparisons test, with adjusted P-values ≤ 0.05 indicating statistical significance. RESULTS One hundred per cent of WT(vDIBH), 43% of WT(FB), 100% of VMAT(vDIBH), 86% of VMAT(FB), 100% of tomotherapy FB and 100% of PBT plans in vDIBH and FB passed all mandatory constraints. However, coverage of the IMC with 90% of the prescribed dose was significantly better than all other techniques using VMAT(vDIBH), PBT(vDIBH) and PBT(FB) (mean IMC coverage ± 1 standard deviation = 96.0% ± 4.3, 99.8% ± 0.3 and 99.0% ± 0.2, respectively). The mean heart dose was significantly reduced in vDIBH compared with FB for both the WT (P < 0.0001) and VMAT (P < 0.0001) techniques. There was no advantage in target volume coverage or OAR doses for PBT(vDIBH) compared with PBT(FB). CONCLUSIONS Simple WT radiotherapy delivered in vDIBH achieves satisfactory coverage of the IMC while meeting heart and lung dose constraints. However, where higher isodose coverage is required, VMAT(vDIBH) is the optimal photon technique. The lowest OAR doses are achieved by PBT, in which the use of vDIBH does not improve dose statistics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Ranger
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| | - A Dunlop
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - K Hutchinson
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - H Convery
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | | | - H Chantler
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - N Twyman
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - C Rose
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - D McQuaid
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - R A Amos
- University College London, London, UK
| | - C Griffin
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - N M deSouza
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - E Donovan
- CVSSP, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - E Harris
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - C E Coles
- University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - A Kirby
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Giles SL, Winfield JM, Collins DJ, Rivens I, Civale J, ter Haar GR, deSouza NM. Value of diffusion-weighted imaging for monitoring tissue change during magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound therapy in bone applications: an ex-vivo study. Eur Radiol Exp 2018; 2:10. [PMID: 29774894 PMCID: PMC5945713 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-018-0041-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2017] [Accepted: 03/15/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Magnetic resonance (MR)-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) can palliate metastatic bone pain by periosteal neurolysis. We investigated the value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for monitoring soft tissue changes adjacent to bone during MR-guided HIFU. We evaluated the repeatability of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement, the temporal evolution of ADC change after sonication, and its relationship with thermal parameters. METHODS Ex-vivo experiments in lamb legs (n = 8) were performed on a Sonalleve MR-guided HIFU system. Baseline proton resonance frequency shift (PRFS) thermometry evaluated the accuracy of temperature measurements and tissue cooling times after exposure. PRFS acquired during sonication (n = 27) was used to estimate thermal dose volume and temperature. After repeat baseline measurements, DWI was assessed longitudinally and relative ADC changes were derived for heated regions. RESULTS Baseline PRFS was accurate to 1 °C and showed that tissues regained baseline temperatures within 5 min. Before sonication, coefficient of variation for repeat ADC measurements was 0.8%. After sonication, ADC increased in the muscle adjacent to the exposed periosteum, it was maximal 1-5 min after sonication, and it significantly differed between samples with persistent versus non-persistent ADC changes beyond 20 min. ADC increases at 20 min were stable for 2 h and correlated significantly with thermal parameters (ADC versus applied acoustic energy at 16-20 min: r = 0.77, p < 0.001). A 20% ADC increase resulted in clear macroscopic tissue damage. CONCLUSIONS Our preliminary results suggest that DWI can detect intra-procedural changes in ex-vivo muscle overlying the periosteum. This could be useful for studying the safety and efficacy of clinical MR-guided HIFU bone treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sharon L. Giles
- MRI Unit, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Jessica M. Winfield
- MRI Unit, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - David J. Collins
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Ian Rivens
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - John Civale
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Gail R. ter Haar
- Therapeutic Ultrasound, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Nandita M. deSouza
- Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Imaging and Radiotherapy, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Harvey H, Morgan V, Fromageau J, O'Shea T, Bamber J, deSouza NM. Ultrasound Shear Wave Elastography of the Normal Prostate: Interobserver Reproducibility and Comparison with Functional Magnetic Resonance Tissue Characteristics. Ultrason Imaging 2018; 40:158-170. [PMID: 29353529 DOI: 10.1177/0161734618754487] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to establish interobserver reproducibility of Young's modulus (YM) derived from ultrasound shear wave elastography (US-SWE) in the normal prostate and correlate it with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) tissue characteristics. Twenty men being screened for prostate cancer underwent same-day US-SWE (10 done by two blinded, newly-trained observers) and mpMRI followed by 12-core biopsy. Bland-Altman plots established limits of agreement for YM. Quantitative data from the peripheral zone (PZ) and the transitional zone (TZ) for YM, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC, mm2/s from diffusion-weighted MRI), and Ktrans (volume transfer coefficient, min-1), Ve (extravascular-extracellular space, %), Kep (rate constant, /min), and initial area under the gadolinium concentration curve (IAUGC60, mmol/L/s) from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI were obtained for slice-matched prostate sextants. Interobserver intraclass correlation coefficients were fair to good for individual regions (PZ = 0.57, TZ = 0.65) and for whole gland 0.67, (increasing to 0.81 when corrected for systematic observer bias). In the PZ, there were weak negative correlations between YM and ADC ( p = 0.008), and Ve ( p = 0.01) and a weak positive correlation with Kep ( p = 0.003). No significant intermodality correlations were seen in the TZ. Transrectal prostate US-SWE done without controlling manually applied probe pressure has fair/good interobserver reproducibility in inexperienced observers with potential to improve this to excellent by standardization of probe contact pressure. Within the PZ, increase in tissue stiffness is associated with reduced extracellular water (decreased ADC) and space (reduced Ve).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hugh Harvey
- 1 Cancer Research UK Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Veronica Morgan
- 1 Cancer Research UK Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Jeremie Fromageau
- 2 Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Tuathan O'Shea
- 2 Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Jeffrey Bamber
- 1 Cancer Research UK Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
- 2 Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| | - Nandita M deSouza
- 1 Cancer Research UK Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|