Cargando…

Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?

CONTEXT: Pituitary adenomas (PA) are often irregularly shaped, particularly posttreatment. There are no standardized radiographic criteria for assessing treatment response, substantially complicating interpretation of prospective outcome data. Existing imaging frameworks for intracranial tumors assu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Imber, Brandon S, Lin, Andrew L, Zhang, Zhigang, Keshavamurthy, Krishna Nand, Deipolyi, Amy Robin, Beal, Kathryn, Cohen, Marc A, Tabar, Viviane, DeAngelis, Lisa M, Geer, Eliza B, Yang, T Jonathan, Young, Robert J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Endocrine Society 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6735764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31528829
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/js.2019-00130
_version_ 1783450407071121408
author Imber, Brandon S
Lin, Andrew L
Zhang, Zhigang
Keshavamurthy, Krishna Nand
Deipolyi, Amy Robin
Beal, Kathryn
Cohen, Marc A
Tabar, Viviane
DeAngelis, Lisa M
Geer, Eliza B
Yang, T Jonathan
Young, Robert J
author_facet Imber, Brandon S
Lin, Andrew L
Zhang, Zhigang
Keshavamurthy, Krishna Nand
Deipolyi, Amy Robin
Beal, Kathryn
Cohen, Marc A
Tabar, Viviane
DeAngelis, Lisa M
Geer, Eliza B
Yang, T Jonathan
Young, Robert J
author_sort Imber, Brandon S
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: Pituitary adenomas (PA) are often irregularly shaped, particularly posttreatment. There are no standardized radiographic criteria for assessing treatment response, substantially complicating interpretation of prospective outcome data. Existing imaging frameworks for intracranial tumors assume perfectly spherical targets and may be suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: To compare a three-dimensional (3D) volumetric approach against accepted surrogate measurements to assess PA posttreatment response (PTR). DESIGN: Retrospective review of patients with available pre- and postradiotherapy (RT) imaging. A neuroradiologist determined tumor sizes in one dimensional (1D) per Response Evaluation in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria, two dimensional (2D) per Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria, and 3D estimates assuming a perfect sphere or perfect ellipsoid. Each tumor was manually segmented for 3D volumetric measurements. The Hakon Wadell method was used to calculate sphericity. SETTING: Tertiary cancer center. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 34, median age = 50 years; 50% male) with PA and MRI scans before and after sellar RT. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received sellar RT for intact or surgically resected lesions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Radiographic PTR, defined as percent tumor size change. RESULTS: Using 3D volumetrics, mean sphericity = 0.63 pre-RT and 0.60 post-RT. With all approaches, most patients had stable disease on post-RT scan. PTR for 1D, 2D, and 3D spherical measurements were moderately well correlated with 3D volumetrics (e.g., for 1D: 0.66, P < 0.0001) and were superior to 3D ellipsoid. Intraclass correlation coefficient demonstrated moderate to good reliability for 1D, 2D, and 3D sphere (P < 0.001); 3D ellipsoid was inferior (P = 0.009). 3D volumetrics identified more potential partially responding and progressive lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Although PAs are irregularly shaped, 1D and 2D approaches are adequately correlated with volumetric assessment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6735764
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Endocrine Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67357642019-09-16 Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough? Imber, Brandon S Lin, Andrew L Zhang, Zhigang Keshavamurthy, Krishna Nand Deipolyi, Amy Robin Beal, Kathryn Cohen, Marc A Tabar, Viviane DeAngelis, Lisa M Geer, Eliza B Yang, T Jonathan Young, Robert J J Endocr Soc Clinical Research Articles CONTEXT: Pituitary adenomas (PA) are often irregularly shaped, particularly posttreatment. There are no standardized radiographic criteria for assessing treatment response, substantially complicating interpretation of prospective outcome data. Existing imaging frameworks for intracranial tumors assume perfectly spherical targets and may be suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: To compare a three-dimensional (3D) volumetric approach against accepted surrogate measurements to assess PA posttreatment response (PTR). DESIGN: Retrospective review of patients with available pre- and postradiotherapy (RT) imaging. A neuroradiologist determined tumor sizes in one dimensional (1D) per Response Evaluation in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria, two dimensional (2D) per Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria, and 3D estimates assuming a perfect sphere or perfect ellipsoid. Each tumor was manually segmented for 3D volumetric measurements. The Hakon Wadell method was used to calculate sphericity. SETTING: Tertiary cancer center. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 34, median age = 50 years; 50% male) with PA and MRI scans before and after sellar RT. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received sellar RT for intact or surgically resected lesions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Radiographic PTR, defined as percent tumor size change. RESULTS: Using 3D volumetrics, mean sphericity = 0.63 pre-RT and 0.60 post-RT. With all approaches, most patients had stable disease on post-RT scan. PTR for 1D, 2D, and 3D spherical measurements were moderately well correlated with 3D volumetrics (e.g., for 1D: 0.66, P < 0.0001) and were superior to 3D ellipsoid. Intraclass correlation coefficient demonstrated moderate to good reliability for 1D, 2D, and 3D sphere (P < 0.001); 3D ellipsoid was inferior (P = 0.009). 3D volumetrics identified more potential partially responding and progressive lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Although PAs are irregularly shaped, 1D and 2D approaches are adequately correlated with volumetric assessment. Endocrine Society 2019-07-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6735764/ /pubmed/31528829 http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/js.2019-00130 Text en Copyright © 2019 Endocrine Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial, No-Derivatives License (CC BY-NC-ND; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Clinical Research Articles
Imber, Brandon S
Lin, Andrew L
Zhang, Zhigang
Keshavamurthy, Krishna Nand
Deipolyi, Amy Robin
Beal, Kathryn
Cohen, Marc A
Tabar, Viviane
DeAngelis, Lisa M
Geer, Eliza B
Yang, T Jonathan
Young, Robert J
Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?
title Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?
title_full Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?
title_fullStr Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?
title_short Comparison of Radiographic Approaches to Assess Treatment Response in Pituitary Adenomas: Is RECIST or RANO Good Enough?
title_sort comparison of radiographic approaches to assess treatment response in pituitary adenomas: is recist or rano good enough?
topic Clinical Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6735764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31528829
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/js.2019-00130
work_keys_str_mv AT imberbrandons comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT linandrewl comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT zhangzhigang comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT keshavamurthykrishnanand comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT deipolyiamyrobin comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT bealkathryn comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT cohenmarca comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT tabarviviane comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT deangelislisam comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT geerelizab comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT yangtjonathan comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough
AT youngrobertj comparisonofradiographicapproachestoassesstreatmentresponseinpituitaryadenomasisrecistorranogoodenough