TY - JOUR
T1 - Early Response Prediction of Multiparametric Functional MRI and18 F-FDG-PET in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated with (Chemo)Radiation
AU - Martens, Roland M.
AU - Koopman, Thomas
AU - Lavini, Cristina
AU - van de Brug, Tim
AU - Zwezerijnen, Gerben J. C.
AU - Marcus, J. Tim
AU - Vergeer, Marije R.
AU - Leemans, C. Rene
AU - de Bree, Remco
AU - de Graaf, Pim
AU - Boellaard, Ronald
AU - Castelijns, Jonas A.
N1 - Funding Information: Funding: This research was funded by The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, grant 10-10400-98-14002. The funding source had no involvement in the collection, analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report, nor in the decision to submit the article for publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2022/1/1
Y1 - 2022/1/1
N2 - Background: Patients with locally-advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have variable responses to (chemo)radiotherapy. A reliable prediction of outcomes allows for enhancing treatment efficacy and follow-up monitoring. Methods: Fifty-seven histopathologically-proven HNSCC patients with curative (chemo)radiotherapy were prospectively included. All patients had an MRI (DW,-IVIM, DCE-MRI) and18 F-FDG-PET/CT before and 10 days after start-treatment (intratreatment). Primary tumor functional imaging parameters were extracted. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to construct prognostic models and risk stratification for 2 year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). Model performance was measured by the cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: The best LRFFS model contained the pretreatment imaging parameters ADC_kurtosis, Kep and SUV_peak, and intratreatment imaging parameters change (∆) ∆-ADC_skewness, ∆-f, ∆-SUV_peak and ∆-total lesion glycolysis (TLG) (AUC = 0.81). Clinical parameters did not enhance LRFFS prediction. The best DMFS model contained pretreatment ADC_kurtosis and SUV_peak (AUC = 0.88). The best OS model contained gender, HPV-status, N-stage, pretreatment ADC_skewness, D, f, metabolic-active tumor volume (MATV), SUV_mean and SUV_peak (AUC = 0.82). Risk stratification in high/medium/low risk was significantly prognostic for LRFFS (p = 0.002), DMFS (p < 0.001) and OS (p = 0.003). Conclusions: Intratreatment functional imaging parameters capture early tumoral changes that only provide prognostic information regarding LRFFS. The best LRFFS model consisted of pretreatment, intratreatment and ∆ functional imaging parameters; the DMFS model consisted of only pretreatment functional imaging parameters, and the OS model consisted ofHPV-status, gender and only pretreatment functional imaging parameters. Accurate clinically applicable risk stratification calculators can enable personalized treatment (adap-tation) management, early on during treatment, improve counseling and enhance patient-specific post-therapy monitoring.
AB - Background: Patients with locally-advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have variable responses to (chemo)radiotherapy. A reliable prediction of outcomes allows for enhancing treatment efficacy and follow-up monitoring. Methods: Fifty-seven histopathologically-proven HNSCC patients with curative (chemo)radiotherapy were prospectively included. All patients had an MRI (DW,-IVIM, DCE-MRI) and18 F-FDG-PET/CT before and 10 days after start-treatment (intratreatment). Primary tumor functional imaging parameters were extracted. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to construct prognostic models and risk stratification for 2 year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS). Model performance was measured by the cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: The best LRFFS model contained the pretreatment imaging parameters ADC_kurtosis, Kep and SUV_peak, and intratreatment imaging parameters change (∆) ∆-ADC_skewness, ∆-f, ∆-SUV_peak and ∆-total lesion glycolysis (TLG) (AUC = 0.81). Clinical parameters did not enhance LRFFS prediction. The best DMFS model contained pretreatment ADC_kurtosis and SUV_peak (AUC = 0.88). The best OS model contained gender, HPV-status, N-stage, pretreatment ADC_skewness, D, f, metabolic-active tumor volume (MATV), SUV_mean and SUV_peak (AUC = 0.82). Risk stratification in high/medium/low risk was significantly prognostic for LRFFS (p = 0.002), DMFS (p < 0.001) and OS (p = 0.003). Conclusions: Intratreatment functional imaging parameters capture early tumoral changes that only provide prognostic information regarding LRFFS. The best LRFFS model consisted of pretreatment, intratreatment and ∆ functional imaging parameters; the DMFS model consisted of only pretreatment functional imaging parameters, and the OS model consisted ofHPV-status, gender and only pretreatment functional imaging parameters. Accurate clinically applicable risk stratification calculators can enable personalized treatment (adap-tation) management, early on during treatment, improve counseling and enhance patient-specific post-therapy monitoring.
KW - CT
KW - MR diffusion weighted imaging
KW - MR dynamic contrast enhanced
KW - PET
KW - PET/CT
KW - Radiation therapy/oncology
KW - functional imaging
KW - head and neck
KW - oncology
KW - outcomes analysis
KW - prognosis
KW - radiation therapy
KW - squamous cell carcinoma
KW - tumor response
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122086957&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14010216
DO - https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14010216
M3 - Article
C2 - 35008380
SN - 2072-6694
VL - 14
JO - Cancers
JF - Cancers
IS - 1
M1 - 216
ER -