Treatment Assessment of pNET and NELM after Everolimus by Quantitative MRI Parameters
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Patients
2.2. MR Imaging
2.3. Image Analysis
2.4. Standard of Reference and Response to Treatment
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Patients
3.2. Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival
3.3. ADC Measurements
3.4. T2 Signal
3.5. Non-Enhanced T1 Signal
3.6. DCE
3.7. Cox Regression of PFS and OS
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Auernhammer, C.J.; Spitzweg, C.; Angele, M.K.; Boeck, S.; Grossman, A.; Nölting, S.; Ilhan, H.; Knösel, T.; Mayerle, J.; Reincke, M.; et al. Advanced neuroendocrine tumours of the small intestine and pancreas: Clinical developments, controversies, and future strategies. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018, 6, 404–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dasari, A.; Shen, C.; Halperin, D.M.; Zhao, B.; Zhou, S.; Xu, Y.; Shih, T.; Yao, J.C. Trends in the Incidence, Prevalence, and Survival Outcomes in Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors in the United States. JAMA Oncol. 2017, 3, 1335–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klöppel, G.; Perren, A.; Heitz, P.U. The Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Cell System and Its Tumors: The WHO Classification. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004, 1014, 13–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yao, J.C.; Pavel, M.; Lombard-Bohas, C.; Van Cutsem, E.; Voi, M.; Brandt, U.; He, W.; Chen, D.; Capdevila, J.; De Vries, E.G.E.; et al. Everolimus for the Treatment of Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Overall Survival and Circulating Biomarkers from the Randomized, Phase III RADIANT-3 Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 34, 3906–3913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Falconi, M.; Eriksson, B.; Kaltsas, G.; Bartsch, D.K.; Capdevila, J.; Caplin, M.; Kos-Kudla, B.; Kwekkeboom, D.; Rindi, G.; Klöppel, G.; et al. ENETS Consensus Guidelines Update for the Management of Patients with Functional Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors and Non-Functional Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors. Neuroendocrinology 2016, 103, 153–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Briest, F.; Grabowski, P. PI3K-AKT-mTOR-Signaling and beyond: The Complex Network in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms. Theranostics 2014, 4, 336–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pavel, M.; Öberg, K.; Falconi, M.; Krenning, E.P.; Sundin, A.; Perren, A.; Berruti, A. Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 2020, 31, 844–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akirov, A.; Larouche, V.; Alshehri, S.; Asa, S.L.; Ezzat, S. Treatment Options for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors. Cancers 2019, 11, 828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yao, J.C.; Shah, M.H.; Ito, T.; Bohas, C.L.; Wolin, E.M.; Van Cutsem, E.; Hobday, T.J.; Okusaka, T.; Capdevila, J.; de Vries, E.G.; et al. Everolimus for Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 364, 514–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lee, L.; Ito, T.; Jensen, R.T. Everolimus in the treatment of neuroendocrine tumors: Efficacy, side-effects, resistance, and factors affecting its place in the treatment sequence. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 2018, 19, 909–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia-Carbonero, R.; Garcia-Figueiras, R.; Carmona-Bayonas, A.; Sevilla, I.; Teule, A.; Quindos, M.; Grande, E.; Capdevila, J.; Aller, J.; Arbizu, J.; et al. Imaging approaches to assess the therapeutic response of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs): Current perspectives and future trends of an exciting field in development. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2015, 34, 823–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Choi, J.-I.; Imagawa, D.K.; Bhosale, P.; Bhargava, P.; Tirkes, T.; Seery, T.E.; Lall, C. Magnetic resonance imaging following treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with sorafenib. Clin. Mol. Hepatol. 2014, 20, 218–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Krajewski, K.M.; Nishino, M.; Franchetti, Y.; Ramaiya, N.H.; Abbeele, A.D.V.D.; Choueiri, T.K. Intraobserver and interobserver variability in computed tomography size and attenuation measurements in patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving antiangiogenic therapy: Implications for alternative response criteria. Cancer 2014, 120, 711–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Solis-Hernandez, M.P.; Del Valle, A.F.; Carmona-Bayonas, A.; Garcia-Carbonero, R.; Custodio, A.; Benavent, M.; Gordoa, T.A.; Nuñez-Valdovino, B.; Canovas, M.S.; Matos, I.; et al. Evaluating radiological response in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours treated with sunitinib: Comparison of Choi versus RECIST criteria (CRIPNET_ GETNE1504 study). Br. J. Cancer 2019, 121, 537–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ko, C.-C.; Yeh, L.-R.; Kuo, Y.-T.; Chen, J.-H. Imaging biomarkers for evaluating tumor response: RECIST and beyond. Biomark. Res. 2021, 9, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vandecaveye, V.; Dresen, R.C.; Pauwels, E.; Van Binnebeek, S.; Vanslembrouck, R.; Baete, K.; Mottaghy, F.M.; Clement, P.M.; Nackaerts, K.; Van Cutsem, E.; et al. Early Whole-Body Diffusion-weighted MRI Helps Predict Long-term Outcome Following Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy for Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors. Radiol. Imaging Cancer 2022, 4, e210095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weikert, T.; Maas, O.C.; Haas, T.; Klarhöfer, M.; Bremerich, J.; Forrer, F.; Sauter, A.W.; Sommer, G. Early Prediction of Treatment Response of Neuroendocrine Hepatic Metastases after Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy with 90Y-DOTATOC Using Diffusion Weighted and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI. Contrast Media Mol. Imaging 2019, 2019, 1517208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wulfert, S.; Kratochwil, C.; Choyke, P.L.; Afshar-Oromieh, A.; Mier, W.; Kauczor, H.-U.; Schenk, J.-P.; Haberkorn, U.; Giesel, F.L. Multimodal Imaging for Early Functional Response Assessment of (90)Y-/(177)Lu-DOTATOC Peptide Receptor Targeted Radiotherapy with DW-MRI and (68)Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT. Mol. Imaging Biol. 2014, 16, 586–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingenerf, M.K.; Karim, H.; Fink, N.; Ilhan, H.; Ricke, J.; Treitl, K.-M.; Schmid-Tannwald, C. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) in response assessment of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) for liver metastases of neuroendocrine tumors (NET): A feasibility study. Acta Radiol. 2021, 63, 877–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, M.; Kessler, L.; Schaarschmidt, B.M.; Fendler, W.P.; Lahner, H.; Antoch, G.; Umutlu, L.; Herrmann, K.; Rischpler, C. Treatment-related changes in neuroendocrine tumors as assessed by textural features derived from 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/MRI with simultaneous acquisition of apparent diffusion coefficient. BMC Cancer 2020, 20, 326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kukuk, G.M.; Mürtz, P.; Träber, F.; Meyer, C.; Ullrich, J.; Gieseke, J.; Ahmadzadehfar, H.; Ezziddin, S.; Schild, H.H.; Willinek, W.A. Diffusion-weighted imaging with acquisition of three b-values for response evaluation of neuroendocrine liver metastases undergoing selective internal radiotherapy. Eur. Radiol. 2014, 24, 267–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dromain, C.; Vullierme, M.; Hicks, R.J.; Prasad, V.; O’Toole, D.; Herder, W.W.; Pavel, M.; Faggiano, A.; Kos-Kudla, B.; Öberg, K.; et al. ENETS standardized (synoptic) reporting for radiological imaging in neuroendocrine tumours. J. Neuroendocr. 2022, 34, e13044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, J.Y.; Hong, S.-M.; Ro, J.Y. Recent updates on grading and classification of neuroendocrine tumors. Ann. Diagn. Pathol. 2017, 29, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yao, J.C.; Pavel, M.; Phan, A.T.; Kulke, M.H.; Hoosen, S.; Peter, J.S.; Cherfi, A.; Öberg, K.E. Chromogranin A and Neuron-Specific Enolase as Prognostic Markers in Patients with Advanced pNET Treated with Everolimus. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2011, 96, 3741–3749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kurita, Y.; Kobayashi, N.; Hara, K.; Mizuno, N.; Kuwahara, T.; Okuno, N.; Haba, S.; Tokuhisa, M.; Hasegawa, S.; Sato, T.; et al. Effectiveness and Prognostic Factors of Everolimus in Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms. Intern. Med. 2022, 9416–9422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rinke, A.; Auernhammer, C.J.; Bodei, L.; Kidd, M.; Krug, S.; Lawlor, R.; Marinoni, I.; Perren, A.; Scarpa, A.; Sorbye, H.; et al. Treatment of advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasia, are we on the way to personalised medicine? Gut 2021, 70, 1768–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Padhani, A.R.; Koh, D.-M. Diffusion MR Imaging for Monitoring of Treatment Response. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 2011, 19, 181–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schraml, C.; Schwenzer, N.F.; Martirosian, P.; Bitzer, M.; Lauer, U.; Claussen, C.D.; Horger, M. Diffusion-Weighted MRI of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma During Sorafenib Treatment: Initial Results. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2009, 193, W301–W307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latour, L.L.; Svoboda, K.; Mitra, P.P.; Sotak, C.H. Time-dependent diffusion of water in a biologicalmodel system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994, 91, 1229–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- García-Figueiras, R.; Baleato-González, S.; Padhani, A.; Luna-Alcalá, A.; Vallejo-Casas, J.A.; Sala, E.; Vilanova, J.C.; Koh, D.-M.; Herranz-Carnero, M.; Vargas, H.A. How clinical imaging can assess cancer biology. Insights Into Imaging 2019, 10, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, R.; Scarpace, L.M.; Ellika, S.; Torcuator, R.; Schultz, L.R.; Hearshen, D.; Mikkelsen, T. Imaging response criteria for recurrent gliomas treated with bevacizumab: Role of diffusion weighted imaging as an imaging biomarker. J. Neuro-Oncol. 2009, 96, 423–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ursprung, S.; Priest, A.N.; Zaccagna, F.; Qian, W.; Machin, A.; Stewart, G.D.; Warren, A.Y.; Eisen, T.; Welsh, S.J.; Gallagher, F.A.; et al. Multiparametric MRI for assessment of early response to neoadjuvant sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0258988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Welsh, S.J.; Thompson, N.; Warren, A.; Priest, A.N.; Barrett, T.; Ursprung, S.; Gallagher, F.A.; Zaccagna, F.; Stewart, G.D.; Fife, K.M.; et al. Dynamic biomarker and imaging changes from a phase II study of pre- and post-surgical sunitinib. Br. J. Urol. 2021, 130, 244–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huijts, C.M.; Santegoets, S.J.; De Jong, T.D.; Verheul, H.; De Gruijl, T.D.; van der Vliet, H. Immunological effects of everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 2017, 30, 341–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Uutela, A.; Ovissi, A.; Hakkarainen, A.; Ristimäki, A.; Lundbom, N.; Kallio, R.; Soveri, L.; Salminen, T.; Ålgars, A.; Halonen, P.; et al. Treatment response of colorectal cancer liver metastases to neoadjuvant or conversion therapy: A prospective multicentre follow-up study using MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging and 1H-MR spectroscopy compared with histology (subgroup in the RAXO trial). ESMO Open 2021, 6, 100208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Horger, M.; Lauer, U.M.; Schraml, C.; Berg, C.P.; Koppenhöfer, U.; Claussen, C.D.; Gregor, M.; Bitzer, M. Early MRI response monitoring of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma under treatment with the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib. BMC Cancer 2009, 9, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yao, J.; Shah, M.; Panneerselvam, A.; Stergiopoulos, S.; Chen, D.; Ito, T.; Pavel, M.; Faivre, S.; Niccoli, P.; Raoul, J.; et al. The Vegf Pathway in Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Efficacy of Everolimus by Baseline Marker Level, and Prognostic and Predictive Effect Analyses from Radiant-3. Ann. Oncol. 2012, 23, ix376–ix382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thüring, J.; Kuhl, C.K.; Barabasch, A.; Hitpass, L.; Bode, M.; Bünting, N.; Bruners, P.; Krämer, N.A. Signal changes in T2-weighted MRI of liver metastases under bevacizumab—A practical imaging biomarker? PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0230553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Patient Characteristics | |||
---|---|---|---|
Sex | |||
Male | 11 | ||
Female | 6 | ||
Median age, years (range) | 68 (27–79) | ||
Grading | |||
G1 | 0 | ||
G2 | 14 (82%) | median Ki-67 (range) | 10 (4–20) |
G3 | 2 (12%) | median Ki-67 (range) | 30 (25–40) |
n/a | 1 (6%) | ||
median CgA (ng/mL) (range) | 1079 (94–29,761) | elevated CgA *, n | 13 (76%) |
median NSE (ng/mL) (range) | 20 (9–87) | elevated NSE *, n | 9 (53%) |
pNET resected | 7 (41%) | ||
prior medical treatment | 14 (82%) | ||
prior PRRT | 8 (47%) | ||
prior liver-targeted therapy | 4 (24%) |
PFS | Univariable | Multivariable | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HR | 95% CI | p-Value | HR | 95% CI | p-Value | |
Age | 0.99 | 0.96–1.02 | 0.48 | |||
ki-67 | 1.03 | 0.97–1.09 | 0.37 | |||
Grading | 2.25 | 0.59–8.5 | 0.23 | |||
Prior systemic treatment | 0.95 | 0.27–3.4 | 0.94 | |||
Duration of everolimus treatment | 0.87 | 0.74–1.02 | 0.09 | 0.88 | 0.75–1.04 | 0.14 |
Elevated CgA * | 0.57 | 0.15–2.2 | 0.41 | |||
Elevated NSE * | 0.54 | 0.14–2.1 | 0.37 | |||
% change ADCmin | 1.00 | 0.99–1 | 0.19 | |||
% change ADCmean | 1.01 | 0.99–1.02 | 0.19 | |||
DADCmin | 0.21 | 0.06–0.8 | 0.02 | 0.30 | 0.07–1.2 | 0.09 |
% change T/L ratio T1 | 0.99 | 0.98–1.0 | 0.10 | |||
% change S/T ratio T2 | 1.01 | 0.99–1.03 | 0.12 |
Univariable | |||
---|---|---|---|
HR | 95% CI | p-Value | |
Age | 1.02 | 0.97–1.07 | 0.49 |
Ki-67 | 1.00 | 0.92–1.07 | 0.87 |
Grading | 0.13 | 0.13–9.7 | 0.91 |
Prior systemic treatment | 31.90 | 0.27–37680 | 0.34 |
Duration of everolimus treatment | 0.79 | 0.54–1.16 | 0.22 |
Elevated CgA * | 1.58 | 0.19–12.95 | 0.67 |
Elevated NSE * | 0.77 | 0.14–4.2 | 0.76 |
% change ADCmin | 1.00 | 0.99–1 | 0.59 |
% change ADCmean | 1.00 | 0.99–1.01 | 0.78 |
DADCmin | 0.39 | 0.07–2.12 | 0.28 |
%change T/L ratio T1 | 0.99 | 0.97–1.0 | 0.12 |
%change S/T ratio T2 | 1.01 | 0.99–1.03 | 0.55 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ingenerf, M.; Kiesl, S.; Winkelmann, M.; Auernhammer, C.J.; Rübenthaler, J.; Grawe, F.; Fabritius, M.P.; Ricke, J.; Schmid-Tannwald, C. Treatment Assessment of pNET and NELM after Everolimus by Quantitative MRI Parameters. Biomedicines 2022, 10, 2618. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102618
Ingenerf M, Kiesl S, Winkelmann M, Auernhammer CJ, Rübenthaler J, Grawe F, Fabritius MP, Ricke J, Schmid-Tannwald C. Treatment Assessment of pNET and NELM after Everolimus by Quantitative MRI Parameters. Biomedicines. 2022; 10(10):2618. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102618
Chicago/Turabian StyleIngenerf, Maria, Sophia Kiesl, Michael Winkelmann, Christoph J. Auernhammer, Johannes Rübenthaler, Freba Grawe, Matthias P. Fabritius, Jens Ricke, and Christine Schmid-Tannwald. 2022. "Treatment Assessment of pNET and NELM after Everolimus by Quantitative MRI Parameters" Biomedicines 10, no. 10: 2618. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102618