Cargando…
Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone
BACKGROUND: Denosumab has been shown to reduce tumor size and progression, reform mineralized bone, and increase intralesional bone density in patients with giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB); however, radiologic assessment of tumors in bone is challenging. The study objective was to assess tumor respo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6146657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30231890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1478-3 |
_version_ | 1783356442575634432 |
---|---|
author | Engellau, Jacob Seeger, Leanne Grimer, Robert Henshaw, Robert Gelderblom, Hans Choy, Edwin Chawla, Sant Reichardt, Peter O’Neal, Michael Feng, Amy Jacobs, Ira Roberts, Zachary J. Braun, Ada Bach, Bruce A. |
author_facet | Engellau, Jacob Seeger, Leanne Grimer, Robert Henshaw, Robert Gelderblom, Hans Choy, Edwin Chawla, Sant Reichardt, Peter O’Neal, Michael Feng, Amy Jacobs, Ira Roberts, Zachary J. Braun, Ada Bach, Bruce A. |
author_sort | Engellau, Jacob |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Denosumab has been shown to reduce tumor size and progression, reform mineralized bone, and increase intralesional bone density in patients with giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB); however, radiologic assessment of tumors in bone is challenging. The study objective was to assess tumor response to denosumab using three different imaging parameters in a prespecified analysis in patients with GCTB from two phase 2 studies. METHODS: The studies enrolled adults and adolescents (skeletally mature and at least 12 years of age) with radiographically measurable GCTB that were given denosumab 120 mg every 4 weeks, with additional doses on days 8 and 15 of cycle 1. The proportion of patients with an objective tumor response was assessed using either Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer response criteria (positron emission tomography [PET] scan criteria), or inverse Choi density/size (ICDS) criteria. Target lesions were measured by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (both studies), PET (study 2 only), or plain film radiograph (study 2 only). RESULTS: Most patients (71.6%) had an objective tumor response by at least one response criteria. Per RECIST, 25.1% of patients had a response; per PET scan criteria, 96.2% had a response; per ICDS, 76.1% had a response. 68.5% had an objective tumor response ≥ 24 weeks. Using any criteria, crude incidence of response ranged from 56% (vertebrae/skull) to 91% (lung/soft tissue), and 98.2% had tumor control ≥ 24 weeks. Reduced PET avidity appeared to be an early sign of response to denosumab treatment. CONCLUSION: Modified PET scan criteria and ICDS criteria indicate that most patients show responses and higher benefit rates than modified RECIST, and therefore may be useful for early assessment of response to denosumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Clinical Trials Registry NCT00396279 (retrospectively registered November 6, 2006) and NCT00680992 (retrospectively registered May 20, 2008). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12957-018-1478-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6146657 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61466572018-09-24 Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone Engellau, Jacob Seeger, Leanne Grimer, Robert Henshaw, Robert Gelderblom, Hans Choy, Edwin Chawla, Sant Reichardt, Peter O’Neal, Michael Feng, Amy Jacobs, Ira Roberts, Zachary J. Braun, Ada Bach, Bruce A. World J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Denosumab has been shown to reduce tumor size and progression, reform mineralized bone, and increase intralesional bone density in patients with giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB); however, radiologic assessment of tumors in bone is challenging. The study objective was to assess tumor response to denosumab using three different imaging parameters in a prespecified analysis in patients with GCTB from two phase 2 studies. METHODS: The studies enrolled adults and adolescents (skeletally mature and at least 12 years of age) with radiographically measurable GCTB that were given denosumab 120 mg every 4 weeks, with additional doses on days 8 and 15 of cycle 1. The proportion of patients with an objective tumor response was assessed using either Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer response criteria (positron emission tomography [PET] scan criteria), or inverse Choi density/size (ICDS) criteria. Target lesions were measured by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (both studies), PET (study 2 only), or plain film radiograph (study 2 only). RESULTS: Most patients (71.6%) had an objective tumor response by at least one response criteria. Per RECIST, 25.1% of patients had a response; per PET scan criteria, 96.2% had a response; per ICDS, 76.1% had a response. 68.5% had an objective tumor response ≥ 24 weeks. Using any criteria, crude incidence of response ranged from 56% (vertebrae/skull) to 91% (lung/soft tissue), and 98.2% had tumor control ≥ 24 weeks. Reduced PET avidity appeared to be an early sign of response to denosumab treatment. CONCLUSION: Modified PET scan criteria and ICDS criteria indicate that most patients show responses and higher benefit rates than modified RECIST, and therefore may be useful for early assessment of response to denosumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Clinical Trials Registry NCT00396279 (retrospectively registered November 6, 2006) and NCT00680992 (retrospectively registered May 20, 2008). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12957-018-1478-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6146657/ /pubmed/30231890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1478-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Engellau, Jacob Seeger, Leanne Grimer, Robert Henshaw, Robert Gelderblom, Hans Choy, Edwin Chawla, Sant Reichardt, Peter O’Neal, Michael Feng, Amy Jacobs, Ira Roberts, Zachary J. Braun, Ada Bach, Bruce A. Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
title | Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
title_full | Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
title_fullStr | Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
title_short | Assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
title_sort | assessment of denosumab treatment effects and imaging response in patients with giant cell tumor of bone |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6146657/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30231890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1478-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT engellaujacob assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT seegerleanne assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT grimerrobert assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT henshawrobert assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT gelderblomhans assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT choyedwin assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT chawlasant assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT reichardtpeter assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT onealmichael assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT fengamy assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT jacobsira assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT robertszacharyj assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT braunada assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone AT bachbrucea assessmentofdenosumabtreatmenteffectsandimagingresponseinpatientswithgiantcelltumorofbone |