Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of volumetric and 2D-based response methods in the PNOC-001 pediatric low-grade glioma clinical trial.
von Reppert, Marc; Ramakrishnan, Divya; Brüningk, Sarah C; Memon, Fatima; Abi Fadel, Sandra; Maleki, Nazanin; Bahar, Ryan; Avesta, Arman E; Jekel, Leon; Sala, Matthew; Lost, Jan; Tillmanns, Niklas; Kaur, Manpreet; Aneja, Sanjay; Fathi Kazerooni, Anahita; Nabavizadeh, Ali; Lin, MingDe; Hoffmann, Karl-Titus; Bousabarah, Khaled; Swanson, Kristin R; Haas-Kogan, Daphne; Mueller, Sabine; Aboian, Mariam S.
Afiliação
  • von Reppert M; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Ramakrishnan D; Department of Neuroradiology, Leipzig University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany.
  • Brüningk SC; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Memon F; Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering, ETH Zürich, Basel, Switzerland.
  • Abi Fadel S; Swiss Institute for Bioinformatics (SIB), Lausanne, Switzerland.
  • Maleki N; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Bahar R; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Avesta AE; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Jekel L; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Sala M; Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Lost J; Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CORE), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Tillmanns N; Department of Neuroradiology, Harvard Medical School-Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Kaur M; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Aneja S; University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
  • Fathi Kazerooni A; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Nabavizadeh A; Tulane School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
  • Lin M; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Hoffmann KT; Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
  • Bousabarah K; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Swanson KR; Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
  • Haas-Kogan D; Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  • Mueller S; Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
  • Aboian MS; Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Neurooncol Adv ; 6(1): vdad172, 2024.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38221978
ABSTRACT

Background:

Although response in pediatric low-grade glioma (pLGG) includes volumetric assessment, more simplified 2D-based methods are often used in clinical trials. The study's purpose was to compare volumetric to 2D methods.

Methods:

An expert neuroradiologist performed solid and whole tumor (including cyst and edema) volumetric measurements on MR images using a PACS-based manual segmentation tool in 43 pLGG participants (213 total follow-up images) from the Pacific Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium (PNOC-001) trial. Classification based on changes in volumetric and 2D measurements of solid tumor were compared to neuroradiologist visual response assessment using the Brain Tumor Reporting and Data System (BT-RADS) criteria for a subset of 65 images using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Longitudinal modeling of solid tumor volume was used to predict BT-RADS classification in 54 of the 65 images.

Results:

There was a significant difference in ROC area under the curve between 3D solid tumor volume and 2D area (0.96 vs 0.78, P = .005) and between 3D solid and 3D whole volume (0.96 vs 0.84, P = .006) when classifying BT-RADS progressive disease (PD). Thresholds of 15-25% increase in 3D solid tumor volume had an 80% sensitivity in classifying BT-RADS PD included in their 95% confidence intervals. The longitudinal model of solid volume response had a sensitivity of 82% and a positive predictive value of 67% for detecting BT-RADS PD.

Conclusions:

Volumetric analysis of solid tumor was significantly better than 2D measurements in classifying tumor progression as determined by BT-RADS criteria and will enable more comprehensive clinical management.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Neurooncol Adv Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Neurooncol Adv Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos