Image-based response assessment of liver metastases following stereotactic body radiotherapy with respiratory tracking

Radiation Oncology

Luc Ceugnart¹  Eric Lartigau²  Andrew Kramar⁴  Antoine Adenis³  Francois Bonodeau¹  Emmanuelle Tresch⁴  Sylvain Dewas²  Sophie Taieb¹  Xavier Mirabel²  Hajer Jarraya¹ 

[1] Department of Radiology, CLCC Oscar Lambret, 3 rue Frédéric Combemale, BP 307, Lille cedex, 59020, France;Department of Radiotherapy, CLCC Oscar Lambret, 3 rue Frédéric Combemale, BP 307, Lille cedex, 59020, France;Department of digestive oncology, CLCC Oscar Lambret, 3 rue Frédéric Combemale, BP 307, Lille cedex, 59020, France;Department of Methodology and Biostatistics, CLCC Oscar Lambret, 3 rue Frédéric Combemale, BP 307, Lille cedex, 59020, France

关键词: Response assessment;    Liver metastasis;    Imaging;    Cyberknife;    Stereotactic body radiotherapy;   

Others  :  1154676
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-717X-8-24

 received in 2012-12-19, accepted in 2013-01-22,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Objective

To describe post-CyberKnife® imaging characteristics of liver metastases as an aid in assessing response to treatment, and a novel set of combined criteria (CC) as an alternative to response according to change in size (RECIST).

Subjects and Methods

Imaging data and medical records of 28 patients with 40 liver metastases treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) were reviewed. Tumor size, CT attenuation coefficient, and contrast enhancement of lesions were evaluated up to 2 years post SBRT. Rates of local control, progression-free survival, time to progression, and overall survival according to RECIST and CC were estimated.

Results

Complete response (CR) was 3.6% (95% CI: 0.1–18%) and 18% (95% CI: 6–37%) according to RECIST and combined criteria, respectively. Two progressive diseases and two partial responses according to RECIST were classified as CR by the combined criteria and one stable response according to RECIST was classified as progressive by CC (Stuart-Maxwell test, p = 0.012). The disease control rate was 60.7% (95% CI: 41–78%) by RECIST and 64% (95% CI: 44%–81%) by CC.

Conclusion

Use of response criteria based on change in size alone in the interpretation of liver response to SBRT may be inadequate. We propose a simple algorithm with a combination of criteria to better assess tumor response. Further studies are needed to confirm their validity.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Jarraya et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Jenkinson MD, Haylock B, Shenoy A, Husband D, Javadpour M: Management of cerebral metastasis: evidence-based approach for surgery, stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy. Eur J Cancer 2011, 47:649-655.
• [2]Feuvret L, Noel G, Nauraye C, Garcia P, J-Mazeron J: [Conformal index and radiotherapy]. Cancer Radiother 2004, 8:108-119.
• [3]Ruers T, Bleichrodt RP: Treatment of liver metastases, an update on the possibilities and results. Eur J Cancer 2002, 38:1023-1033.
• [4]Sawrie SM, Fiveash JB, Caudell JJ: Stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver metastases and primary hepatocellular carcinoma: normal tissue tolerances and toxicity. Cancer Control 2010, 17:111-119.
• [5]Fuss M, Thomas CR Jr: Stereotactic body radiation therapy: an ablative treatment option for primary and secondary liver tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 2004, 11:130-138.
• [6]Vautravers-Dewas C, Dewas S, Bonodeau F, Adenis A, Lacornerie T, Penel N, Lartigau E, Mirabel X: Image-guided robotic stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver metastases: is there a dose response relationship? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 81:e39-47.
• [7]Ambrosino G, Polistina F, Costantin G, Francescon P, Guglielmi R, Zanco P, Casamassima F, Febbraro A, Gerunda G, Lumachi F: Image-guided robotic stereotactic radiosurgery for unresectable liver metastases: preliminary results. Anticancer Res 2009, 29:3381-3384.
• [8]Goodman KA, Wiegner EA, Maturen KE, Zhang Z, Mo Q, Yang G, Gibbs IC, Fisher GA, Koong AC: Dose-escalation study of single-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 78:486-493.
• [9]Goyal K, Einstein D, Yao M, Kunos C, Barton F, Singh D, Siegel C, Stulberg J, Sanabria J: Cyberknife stereotactic body radiation therapy for nonresectable tumors of the liver: preliminary results. HPB Surg 2010, 2010:pii 309780.
• [10]Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A: Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981, 47:207-214.
• [11]Chung EP, Herts BR, Linnell G, Novick AC, Obuchowski N, Coll DM, Baker ME: Analysis of changes in attenuation of proven renal cysts on different scanning phases of triphasic MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004, 182:405-410.
• [12]Nishino M, Jagannathan JP, Ramaiya NH, Van den Abbeele AD: Revised RECIST guideline version 1.1: What oncologists want to know and what radiologists need to know. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 195:281-289.
• [13]Choi H, Charnsangavej C, de Castro Faria S, Tamm EP, Benjamin RS, Johnson MM, Macapinlac HA, Podoloff DA: CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib mesylate treatment: a quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004, 183:1619-1628.
• [14]Coenegrachts K: Magnetic resonance imaging of the liver: New imaging strategies for evaluating focal liver lesions. World J Radiol 2009, 1:72-85.
• [15]Caretti V, Zondervan I, Meijer DH, Idema S, Vos W, Hamans B, Bugiani M, Hulleman E, Wesseling P, Vandertop WP, Noske DP, Kaspers G, Molthoff CF, Wurdinger T: Monitoring of tumor growth and post-irradiation recurrence in a diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma mouse model. Brain Pathol 2011, 21:441-451.
• [16]Cheebsumon P, Velasquez LM, Hoekstra CJ, Hayes W, Kloet RW, Hoetjes NJ, Smit EF, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA, Boellaard R: Measuring response to therapy using FDG PET: semi-quantitative and full kinetic analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011, 38:832-842.
• [17]Padhani AR, Koh DM: Diffusion MR imaging for monitoring of treatment response. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2011, 19:181-209.
• [18]Rusthoven KE, Kavanagh BD, Cardenes H, Stieber VW, Burri SH, Feigenberg SJ, Chidel MA, Pugh TJ, Franklin W, Kane M, Gaspar LE, Schefter TE: Multi-institutional phase I/II trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver metastases. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:1572-1578.
• [19]Lee MT, Kim JJ, Dinniwell R, Ley J, Lockwood G, Wong R, Cummings B, Ringash J, Tse RV, Knox JJ, Dawson LA: Phase I study of individualized stereotactic body radiotherapy of liver metastases. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:1585-1591.
• [20]Takayasu K, Arii S, Matsuo N, Yoshikawa M, Ryu M, Takasaki K, Sato M, Yamanaka N, Shimamura Y, Ohto M: Comparison of CT findings with resected specimens after chemoembolization with iodized oil for hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000, 175:699-704.
• [21]Dromain C, de Baere T, Elias D, Kuoch V, Ducreux M, Boige V, Petrow P, Roche A, Sigal R: Hepatic tumors treated with percutaneous radio-frequency ablation: CT and MR imaging follow-up. Radiology 2002, 223:255-262.
• [22]Ebied OM, Federle MP, Carr BI, Pealer KM, Li W, Amesur N, Zajko A: Evaluation of responses to chemoembolization in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer 2003, 97:1042-1050.
• [23]Kalb B, Chamsuddin A, Nazzal L, Sharma P, Martin DR: Chemoembolization follow-up of hepatocellular carcinoma with MR imaging: usefulness of evaluating enhancement features on one-month posttherapy MR imaging for predicting residual disease. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010, 21:1396-1404.
• [24]Lencioni R, Llovet JM: Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2010, 30:52-60.
• [25]Chun YS, Vauthey JN, Boonsirikamchai P, Maru DM, Kopetz S, Palavecino M, Curley SA, Abdalla EK, Kaur H, Charnsangavej C, Loyer EM: Association of computed tomography morphologic criteria with pathologic response and survival in patients treated with bevacizumab for colorectal liver metastases. JAMA 2009, 302:2338-2344.
• [26]Siegel CL, Fisher AJ, Bennett HF: Interobserver variability in determining enhancement of renal masses on helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999, 172:1207-1212.
• [27]Wong CY, Salem R, Raman S, Gates VL, Dworkin HJ: Evaluating 90Y-glass microsphere treatment response of unresectable colorectal liver metastases by [18F]FDG PET: a comparison with CT or MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002, 29:815-820.
• [28]Olsen CC, Welsh J, Kavanagh BD, Franklin W, McCarter M, Cardenes HR, Gaspar LE, Schefter TE: Microscopic and macroscopic tumor and parenchymal effects of liver stereotactic body radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 73:1414-1424.
• [29]Herfarth KK, Hof H, Bahner ML, Lohr F, Höss A, van Kaick G, Wannenmacher M, Debus J: Assessment of focal liver reaction by multiphasic CT after stereotactic single-dose radiotherapy of liver tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003, 57:444-451.
• [30]Yamasaki SA, Marn CS, Francis IR, Robertson JM, Lawrence TS: High-dose localized radiation therapy for treatment of hepatic malignant tumors: CT findings and their relation to radiation hepatitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995, 165:79-84.