Wait-and-scan: an alternative for curettage in atypical cartilaginous tumours of the long bones.

Aims: Due to its indolent clinical behaviour, the treatment paradigm of atypical cartilaginous tumours (ACTs) in the long bones is slowly shifting from intralesional resection (curettage) and local adjuvants, towards active surveillance through wait-and-scan follow-up. In this retrospective cohort study performed in a tertiary referral centre, we studied the natural behaviour of ACT lesions by active surveillance with MRI. Clinical symptoms were not considered in the surveillance programme. Methods: The aim of this study was to see whether active surveillance is safe regarding malignant degeneration and local progression. In total, 117 patients were evaluated with MRI assessing growth, cortical destruction, endosteal scalloping, periosteal reaction, relation to the cortex, and perilesional bone marrow oedema. Patients received up to six follow-up scans. Results: At the time of the first follow-up MRI, 8% of the lesions showed growth (n = 9), 86% remained stable (101), and 6% decreased in size (n = 7). During the third follow-up, with a mean follow-up time of 60 months (SD 23), 24 patients were scanned, of whom 13% had lesions that had grown and 13% lesions that had decreased in size. After 96 months (SD 37), at the sixth follow-up MRI, 100% of the lesions remained stable. None of the lesions showed malignant progression and although some lesions grew in size (mean 1 mm (SD 0.8)), no malignant progression occurred. Conclusion: We conclude that active surveillance with MRI is safe for ACTs in the long bones in the short- and mid-term follow-up.

Characterization of denosumab treatment response in giant cell tumors of bone with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody used neo-adjuvantly in giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) to facilitate surgery, or long term for axial tumors where surgery comes with high morbidity. Time intervals for treatment effects to occur are unclear and monitoring tools are limited, complicating optimal drug dose titration. We assessed changes in time intensity curve (TIC) - derived perfusion features on DCE-MRI in GCTB during denosumab treatment and evaluated the duration of treatment effects on tumor perfusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with GCTB who underwent dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI before (t = 0) and after 3 (t = 3), 6 (t = 6) or 12 (t = 12) months of denosumab treatment were retrospectively included in a single center. Regions of interest were placed on tumor compartments with visually most intense enhancement and TICs were created. Time-to-enhancement (TTE), wash-in rate (WIR), maximal relative enhancement (MRE), and area-under-the-curve (AUC) were calculated. Differences in perfusion features were calculated with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: In all 24 patients decreased perfusion on DCE-MRI after start of denosumab treatment was seen. TTE increased between t = 0 and t = 3 (p < 0.001). WIR, MRE and AUC decreased between t = 0 and t = 3 (p < 0.001, p = 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). No significant differences in features were found between t = 3 and t = 6 or t = 6 and t = 12. No significant perfusion differences in primary versus recurrent, or axial versus appendicular tumors, were found. CONCLUSION: MRI perfusion significantly changed in GCTB within 3 months of denosumab treatment compared to baseline. No further significant change occurred between 3 and 6, and 6 and 12 months of treatment. These findings suggest that evaluation of treatment response and subsequent consideration of maintenance with lower doses of denosumab, may already be indicated after 3 months. In cases where long term denosumab is the preferred therapy, monitoring change in tumor characteristics on DCE-MRI may aid optimal drug dose titration, minimizing side effects.

Malignant Transformation of Giant Cell Tumor of Bone and the Association with Denosumab Treatment: A Radiology and Pathology Perspective.

Objective: Malignancy in giant cell tumor of bone (mGCTB) is categorized as primary (concomitantly with conventional GCTB) or secondary (after radiotherapy or other treatment). Denosumab therapy has been suggested to play a role in the etiology of secondary mGCTB. In this case series from a tertiary referral sarcoma center, we aimed to find distinctive features for malignant transformation in GCTB on different imaging modalities. Furthermore, we assessed the duration of denosumab treatment and lag time to the development of malignancy. Methods: From a histopathology database search, 6 patients were pathologically confirmed as having initial conventional GCTB and subsequently with secondary mGCTB. Results: At the time of mGCTB diagnosis, 2 cases were treated with denosumab only, 2 with denosumab and surgery, 1 with multiple curettages and radiotherapy, and 1 with surgery only. In the 4 denosumab treated patients, the mean lag time to malignant transformation was 7 months (range 2-11 months). Imaging findings suspicious of malignant transformation related to denosumab therapy are the absence of fibro-osseous matrix formation and absent neocortex formation on CT, and stable or even increased size of the soft tissue component. Conclusion: In 4 patients treated with denosumab, secondary mGCTB occurred within the first year after initiation of treatment. Radiotherapy-associated mGCTB has a longer lag time than denosumab-associated mGCTB. Close clinical and imaging follow-up during the first months of denosumab therapy is key, as mGCTB tends to have rapid aggressive behavior, similar to other high-grade sarcomas. Nonresponders should be (re) evaluated for their primary diagnosis of conventional GCTB.

The effect of Imatinib Mesylate in diffuse-type Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumours on MR imaging and PET-CT.

INTRODUCTION: Recurrence rates remain high after surgical treatment of diffuse-type Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumour (TGCT). Imatinib Mesylate (IM) blocks Colony Stimulating Factor1 Receptor (CSF1R), the driver mechanism in TGCT. The aim of this study was to determine if IM reduces the tumour metabolic activity evaluated by PET-CT and to compare this response with the response seen on MR imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 25 Consecutive patients treated with IM (off label use) for locally advanced (N = 12) or recurrent (N = 13) diffuse-type TGCT were included, 15 male and median age at diagnosis 39 (IQR 31-47) years. The knee was most frequently affected (n = 16; 64%). The effect of IM was assessed pre- and post-IM treatment by comparing MR scans and PET-CT. MR scans were assessed by Tumour Volume Score (TVS), an estimation of the tumour volume as a percentage of the total synovial cavity. PET-CT scans were evaluated based on maximum standardized uptake value (SUV-max). Partial response was defined as more than 50% tumour reduction with TVS and a decrease of at least 30% on SUV-max. RESULTS: Median duration of IM treatment was 7.0 (IQR 4.2-11.5) months. Twenty patients (80%) discontinued IM treatment for poor response or intended surgery. Twenty patients experienced an adverse event grade 1-2, three patients grade 3 (creatinine increment, neutropenic sepsis, liver dysfunction). MR assessment of all joints showed 32% (6/19) partial response and 63% (12/19) stable disease, with a mean difference of 12% (P = 0.467; CI -22.4-46.0) TVS between pre- and post-IM and a significant mean difference of 23% (P = 0.021; CI 4.2-21.6) in all knee lesions. PET-CT, all joints, showed a significantly decreased mean difference of 5.3 (P = 0.004; CI 1.9-8.7) SUV-max between pre- and post-IM treatment (58% (11/19) partial response, 37% (7/19) stable disease). No correlation between MR imaging and PET-CT could be appreciated in 15 patients with complete radiological data. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the moderate radiological response of IM in diffuse-type TGCT. PET-CT is a valuable additional diagnostic tool to quantify response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. Its value should be assessed further to validate its efficacy in the objective measurement of biological response in targeted systemic treatment of TGCT.