Prognostic value of total tumor volume in patients with colorectal liver metastases: A secondary analysis of the randomized CAIRO5 trial with external cohort validation.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of total tumor volume (TTV) for early recurrence (within 6 months) and overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), treated with induction systemic therapy followed by complete local treatment. METHODS: Patients with initially unresectable CRLM from the multicenter randomized phase 3 CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) who received induction systemic therapy followed by local treatment were included. Baseline TTV and change in TTV as response to systemic therapy were calculated using the CT scan before and the first after systemic treatment, and were assessed for their added prognostic value. The findings were validated in an external cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center. RESULTS: In total, 215 CAIRO5 patients were included. Baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV were significantly associated with early recurrence (P = 0.005 and P = 0.040, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P = 0.024 and P = 0.006, respectively), whereas RECIST1.1 was not prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.88) and OS (P = 0.35). In the validation cohort (n = 85), baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV remained prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.041 and P = 0.021, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.012, respectively), and showed added prognostic value over conventional clinicopathological variables (increase C-statistic, 0.06; 95 % CI, 0.02 to 0.14; P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Total tumor volume is strongly prognostic for early recurrence and OS in patients who underwent complete local treatment of initially unresectable CRLM, both in the CAIRO5 trial and the validation cohort. In contrast, RECIST1.1 did not show prognostic value for neither early recurrence nor OS.

The Added Diagnostic Value of Transcatheter CT Hepatic Arteriography for Intraprocedural Detection of Previously Unknown Colorectal Liver Metastases During Percutaneous Ablation and Impact on the Definitive Treatment Plan.

PURPOSE: This study assessed the diagnostic value of CT hepatic arteriography (CTHA) for the intraprocedural detection of previously unknown colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) and the impact on the definitive treatment plan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients treated with CTHA-guided percutaneous ablation for CRLM between January 2012 and March 2022 were identified from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE). Radiology reports of the ablative procedure and follow-up imaging were reviewed to see if (a) previously unknown CRLM were detected intra-procedurally and if (b) new CRLM, potentially missed on CTHA, appeared within 6 months following the procedure; three abdominal radiologists re-reviewed the baseline CTHA scans of these patients with early recurrence. To ratify immediate ablations of concomitantly detected CRLM, the upper limit of false positives was predefined at 10%. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-two patients were included. With CTHA, a total of 17 additional tumours in 15 patients were diagnosed and treated immediately, two representing disappeared tumours following systemic chemotherapy. Compared to the conventional contrast-enhanced (ce)CT, ceMRI and 18F-FDG PET-CT, adding CTHA was superior for the detection of CRLM (P < .001). Within 12 months of follow-up 121, new CRLM appeared in 49/152 patients (32.2%); retrospective blinded assessment revealed 56 to already be visible on the baseline CTHA scan (46%); four lesions without substrate on follow-up scans were considered false positives (n = 4/60; 7%). Arterial ring enhancement was the most frequently reported imaging characteristic (n = 45/60; 75%). CONCLUSION: The subsequent use of CTHA has added value for the detection of previously unknown and vanished CRLM. Taking into account the low number of false positives (7%) and the favourable safety profile of percutaneous ablation, we believe that immediate ablation of typical ring-enhancing supplementary tumours is justified and sufficiently validated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3; individual cross-sectional study with consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

Deep learning models for automatic tumor segmentation and total tumor volume assessment in patients with colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: We developed models for tumor segmentation to automate the assessment of total tumor volume (TTV) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, pre- and post-systemic treatment computed tomography (CT) scans of 259 patients with initially unresectable CRLM of the CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) were included. In total, 595 CT scans comprising 8,959 CRLM were divided into training (73%), validation (6.5%), and test sets (21%). Deep learning models were trained with ground truth segmentations of the liver and CRLM. TTV was calculated based on the CRLM segmentations. An external validation cohort was included, comprising 72 preoperative CT scans of patients with 112 resectable CRLM. Image segmentation evaluation metrics and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated. RESULTS: In the test set (122 CT scans), the autosegmentation models showed a global Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 0.96 (liver) and 0.86 (CRLM). The corresponding median per-case DSC was 0.96 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.95-0.96) and 0.80 (IQR 0.67-0.87). For tumor segmentation, the intersection-over-union, precision, and recall were 0.75, 0.89, and 0.84, respectively. An excellent agreement was observed between the reference and automatically computed TTV for the test set (ICC 0.98) and external validation cohort (ICC 0.98). In the external validation, the global DSC was 0.82 and the median per-case DSC was 0.60 (IQR 0.29-0.76) for tumor segmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Deep learning autosegmentation models were able to segment the liver and CRLM automatically and accurately in patients with initially unresectable CRLM, enabling automatic TTV assessment in such patients. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Automatic segmentation enables the assessment of total tumor volume in patients with colorectal liver metastases, with a high potential of decreasing radiologist's workload and increasing accuracy and consistency. KEY POINTS: • Tumor response evaluation is time-consuming, manually performed, and ignores total tumor volume. • Automatic models can accurately segment tumors in patients with colorectal liver metastases. • Total tumor volume can be accurately calculated based on automatic segmentations.

Interobserver Variability in CT-based Morphologic Tumor Response Assessment of Colorectal Liver Metastases.

Purpose To evaluate interobserver variability in the morphologic tumor response assessment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) managed with systemic therapy and to assess the relation of morphologic response with gene mutation status, targeted therapy, and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 measurements. Materials and Methods Participants with initially unresectable CRLM receiving different systemic therapy regimens from the randomized, controlled CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) were included in this prospective imaging study. Three radiologists independently assessed morphologic tumor response on baseline and first follow-up CT scans according to previously published criteria. Two additional radiologists evaluated disagreement cases. Interobserver agreement was calculated by using Fleiss κ. On the basis of the majority of individual radiologic assessments, the final morphologic tumor response was determined. Finally, the relation of morphologic tumor response and clinical prognostic parameters was assessed. Results In total, 153 participants (median age, 63 years [IQR, 56-71]; 101 men) with 306 CT scans comprising 2192 CRLM were included. Morphologic assessment performed by the three radiologists yielded 86 (56%) agreement cases and 67 (44%) disagreement cases (including four major disagreement cases). Overall interobserver agreement between the panel radiologists on morphology groups and morphologic response categories was moderate (κ = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.48, 0.58 and κ = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.60). Optimal morphologic response was particularly observed in patients treated with bevacizumab (P = .001) and in patients with RAS/BRAF mutation (P = .04). No evidence of a relationship between RECIST 1.1 and morphologic response was found (P = .61). Conclusion Morphologic tumor response assessment following systemic therapy in participants with CRLM demonstrated considerable interobserver variability. Keywords: Tumor Response, Observer Performance, CT, Liver, Metastases, Oncology, Abdomen/Gastrointestinal Clinical trial registration no. NCT02162563 Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2022.

Thermal Ablation versus Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy to Treat Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Comparative Analysis from the Prospective Amsterdam CORE Registry.

Thermal ablation and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) are techniques to eradicate colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This study compares the safety, efficacy and long-term oncological outcomes of these treatment methods. All prospectively registered patients (AmCORE registry) treated with thermal ablation or SABR alone for unresectable CRLM between 2007 and 2020 were analyzed using multivariate Cox-proportional hazard regression. In total 199 patients were included for analysis: 144 (400 CRLM) thermal ablation; 55 (69 CRLM) SABR. SABR patients were characterized by older age (p = 0.006), extrahepatic disease at diagnosis (p = 0.004) and larger tumors (p < 0.001). Thermal ablation patients were more likely to have synchronous disease, higher clinical risk scores (p = 0.030) and higher numbers of CRLMs treated (p < 0.001). Mortality was zero and morbidity low in both groups: no serious adverse events were recorded following SABR (n = 0/55) and nine (n = 9/144 [6.3%]; all CTCAE grade 3) after thermal ablation. SABR was associated with an inferior overall survival (OS) (median OS 53.0 months vs. 27.4 months; HR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.49; p = 0.003), local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) per-tumor (HR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.01-1.52; p = 0.044) and local control per-patient (HR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.20-2.04; p = 0.001) and per-tumor (HR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.44-2.49; p < 0.001). In this study thermal ablation was superior to SABR with regard to OS, LTPFS and local control, albeit at the cost of a limited risk of serious adverse events. Further studies are required to assess whether the worse outcomes following SABR were the effect of true differences in ablative treatment or a result of residual confounding.