OBJECT: Immunotherapy targeting the Wilms tumor 1 (WT1) gene product is a promising treatment modality for patients with malignant gliomas, and there have been reports of encouraging results. It has become clear, however, that Gd-enhanced MR imaging does not reflect prognosis, thereby necessitating a more robust imaging evaluation system for monitoring response to WT1 immunotherapy. To meet this demand, the authors performed a voxel-wise parametric response map (PRM) analysis of (11)C-methionine PET (MET-PET) in WT1 immunotherapy and compared the data with the overall survival after initiation of WT1 immunotherapy (OS(WT1)). METHODS: Fourteen patients with recurrent malignant glioma were included in the study, and OS(WT1) was compared with: 1) volume and length change in the contrast area of the tumor on Gd-enhanced MR images; 2) change in maximum uptake of (11)C-methionine; and 3) a more detailed voxel-wise PRM analysis of MET-PET pre- and post-WT1 immunotherapy. RESULTS: The PRM analysis was able to identify the following 3 areas within the tumor core: 1) area with no change in (11)C-methionine uptake pre- and posttreatment; 2) area with increased (11)C-methionine uptake posttreatment (PRM(+MET)); and 3) area with decreased (11)C-methionine uptake posttreatment. While the results of Gd-enhanced MR imaging volumetric and conventional MET-PET analysis did not correlate with OS(WT1) (p = 0.270 for Gd-enhanced MR imaging length, p = 0.960 for Gd-enhanced MR imaging volume, and p = 0.110 for MET-PET), the percentage of PRM(+MET) area showed excellent correlation (p = 0.008) with OS(WT1). CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the limited value of Gd-enhanced MR imaging and highlights the potential of voxel-wise PRM analysis of MET-PET for monitoring treatment response in immunotherapy for malignant gliomas. Clinical trial registration no.: UMIN000002001.
OBJECT: Immunotherapy targeting the Wilms tumor 1 (WT1) gene product is a promising treatment modality for patients with malignant gliomas, and there have been reports of encouraging results. It has become clear, however, that Gd-enhanced MR imaging does not reflect prognosis, thereby necessitating a more robust imaging evaluation system for monitoring response to WT1 immunotherapy. To meet this demand, the authors performed a voxel-wise parametric response map (PRM) analysis of (11)C-methionine PET (MET-PET) in WT1 immunotherapy and compared the data with the overall survival after initiation of WT1 immunotherapy (OS(WT1)). METHODS: Fourteen patients with recurrent malignant glioma were included in the study, and OS(WT1) was compared with: 1) volume and length change in the contrast area of the tumor on Gd-enhanced MR images; 2) change in maximum uptake of (11)C-methionine; and 3) a more detailed voxel-wise PRM analysis of MET-PET pre- and post-WT1 immunotherapy. RESULTS: The PRM analysis was able to identify the following 3 areas within the tumor core: 1) area with no change in (11)C-methionine uptake pre- and posttreatment; 2) area with increased (11)C-methionine uptake posttreatment (PRM(+MET)); and 3) area with decreased (11)C-methionine uptake posttreatment. While the results of Gd-enhanced MR imaging volumetric and conventional MET-PET analysis did not correlate with OS(WT1) (p = 0.270 for Gd-enhanced MR imaging length, p = 0.960 for Gd-enhanced MR imaging volume, and p = 0.110 for MET-PET), the percentage of PRM(+MET) area showed excellent correlation (p = 0.008) with OS(WT1). CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the limited value of Gd-enhanced MR imaging and highlights the potential of voxel-wise PRM analysis of MET-PET for monitoring treatment response in immunotherapy for malignant gliomas. Clinical trial registration no.: UMIN000002001.
Authors: Jennifer L Boes; Benjamin A Hoff; Nola Hylton; Martin D Pickles; Lindsay W Turnbull; Anne F Schott; Alnawaz Rehemtulla; Ryan Chamberlain; Benjamin Lemasson; Thomas L Chenevert; Craig J Galbán; Charles R Meyer; Brian D Ross Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 4.243
Authors: Jean-Christophe Brisset; Benjamin A Hoff; Thomas L Chenevert; Jon A Jacobson; Jennifer L Boes; Stefanie Galbán; Alnawaz Rehemtulla; Timothy D Johnson; Kenneth J Pienta; Craig J Galbán; Charles R Meyer; Timothy Schakel; Klaas Nicolay; Ajjai S Alva; Maha Hussain; Brian D Ross Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-04-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Stephen C Frederico; John C Hancock; Emily E S Brettschneider; Nivedita M Ratnam; Mark R Gilbert; Masaki Terabe Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-05-10 Impact factor: 6.244