Measurements of Metastatic Renal Cell Tumours As Determined by Diffusion Weighted Imaging or Computed Tomography Are in Close Agreement, a Pilot Study

Overview

Journal Eur J Radiol Open

Specialty Radiology

Date 2017 Apr 27

PMID 28443292

Authors

J Farnebo

C Suzuki

R Vargas-Paris

P Sandstrom

L Blomqvist

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) provides both functional and anatomical information regarding tumours but can also be used for tumour detection. Today, tumour treatment response in clinical trials is mainly assessed on Computed Tomography (CT) using established criteria. Despite availability of dedicated software, CT still requires significant manual work for selection and measurement in treatment response evaluation of solid tumours.

Purpose: To compare the maximum diameter of tumour lesions on CT with the corresponding measurements on diffusion weighted images.

Materials And Methods: In this prospective cohort, metastatic lesions were identified on CT and on DWI in five patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma before and after three months of treatment with pazopanib. Two radiologists independently measured the same lesions on axial CT images and separately also on axial DWI images. The measurements were compared between CT and DWI with respect to the number of target lesions measured, size of the lesions, size reduction due to treatment and the inter-observer variability. Wilcoxon signed rank test, linear regression and Bland-Altman plots were used for statistical analyses.

Results: In this pilot study, there was no significant inter-observer variability in terms of numbers of lesion selected between CT and DWI. A significant reduction of lesion size was observed both for CT and DWI when post-treatment scans were compared to pre-treatment scans. There was no significant difference in measurement of lesion size on both pre- and post treatment scans between CT and DWI (p = 0.099 and p = 0.388 respectively).

Conclusion: Measurement of the size of metastatic lesions on the basis of axial DWI images are in close agreement with measurement based on conventional axial CT images, the most often employed approach in clinical trials today. The results in this pilot study can be used to estimate sufficient sample size in a larger trial with adequate power, were the results can be confirmed in a wider range of cancers other than renal cell carcinoma.

References

Therasse P, Arbuck S, Eisenhauer E, Wanders J, Kaplan R, Rubinstein L . New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92(3):205-16. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205. View

Attariwala R, Picker W . Whole body MRI: improved lesion detection and characterization with diffusion weighted techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013; 38(2):253-68. PMC: 3795449. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24285. View

Takahara T, Imai Y, Yamashita T, Yasuda S, Nasu S, Van Cauteren M . Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med. 2004; 22(4):275-82. View

Luna A, Pahwa S, Bonini C, Alcala-Mata L, Wright K, Gulani V . Multiparametric MR Imaging in Abdominal Malignancies. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2015; 24(1):157-186. PMC: 4974463. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2015.08.005. View

Nishino M, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gargano M, Suda M, Ramaiya N, Hodi F . Developing a common language for tumor response to immunotherapy: immune-related response criteria using unidimensional measurements. Clin Cancer Res. 2013; 19(14):3936-43. PMC: 3740724. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0895. View

Tran L, Brown M, Goldin J, Yan X, Pais R, McNitt-Gray M . Comparison of treatment response classifications between unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric measurements of metastatic lung lesions on chest computed tomography. Acad Radiol. 2004; 11(12):1355-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2004.09.004. View

Zhao B, James L, Moskowitz C, Guo P, Ginsberg M, Lefkowitz R . Evaluating variability in tumor measurements from same-day repeat CT scans of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Radiology. 2009; 252(1):263-72. PMC: 2797680. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2522081593. View

Afaq A, Andreou A, Koh D . Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for tumour response assessment: why, when and how?. Cancer Imaging. 2010; 10 Spec no A:S179-88. PMC: 2967137. DOI: 10.1102/1470-7330.2010.9032. View

Eisenhauer E, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz L, Sargent D, Ford R . New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2008; 45(2):228-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. View

10.

Suzuki C, Torkzad M, Jacobsson H, Astrom G, Sundin A, Hatschek T . Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the response evaluation of cancer therapy according to RECIST and WHO-criteria. Acta Oncol. 2010; 49(4):509-14. DOI: 10.3109/02841861003705794. View

11.

Blackledge M, Collins D, Tunariu N, Orton M, Padhani A, Leach M . Assessment of treatment response by total tumor volume and global apparent diffusion coefficient using diffusion-weighted MRI in patients with metastatic bone disease: a feasibility study. PLoS One. 2014; 9(4):e91779. PMC: 3977851. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091779. View

12.

Lavelle L, ONeill A, McMahon C, Cantwell C, Heffernan E, Malone D . Is diffusion-weighted MRI sufficient for follow-up of neuroendocrine tumour liver metastases?. Clin Radiol. 2016; 71(9):863-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2016.05.016. View

13.

Kim A, Kim C, Park S, Park B . Diffusion-weighted imaging to evaluate for changes from androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014; 203(6):W645-50. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.12277. View

14.

JAMES K, Eisenhauer E, Christian M, Terenziani M, Vena D, Muldal A . Measuring response in solid tumors: unidimensional versus bidimensional measurement. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999; 91(6):523-8. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/91.6.523. View