Jan Baxa1, Tana Matouskova2, Gabriela Krakorova3, Bernhard Schmidt4, Thomas Flohr4, Martin Sedlmair4, Jiri Bejcek2, Jiri Ferda2. 1. Department of Imaging Methods, Faculty of Medicine and University Teaching Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic. baxaj@fnplzen.cz. 2. Department of Imaging Methods, Faculty of Medicine and University Teaching Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic. 3. Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Faculty of Medicine and University Teaching Hospital in Pilsen, Pilsen, Czech Republic. 4. Siemens Healthcare, CT division, Forchheim, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship of dual-phase dual-energy CT (DE-CT) and tumour size in the evaluation of the response to anti-EGFR therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Dual-phase DE-CT was performed in 31 patients with NSCLC before the onset of anti-EGFR (erlotinib) therapy and as follow-up (mean 8 weeks). Iodine uptake (IU; mg/mL) was quantified using prototype software in arterial and venous phases; arterial enhancement fraction (AEF) was calculated. The change of IU before and after therapy onset was compared with anatomical evaluation in maximal transverse diameter and volume (responders vs. non-responders). RESULTS: A significant decrease of IU in venous phase was proved in responders according to all anatomical parameters (p=0.002-0.016). In groups of non-responders, a significant change of IU was not proved with variable trends of development. The most significant change was observed using the anatomical parameter of volume (cut-off 73 %). A significant difference of percentage change in AEF was proved between responding and non-responders (p=0.019-0.043). CONCLUSION: Dual-phase DE-CT with iodine uptake quantification is a feasible method with potential benefit in advanced assessment of anti-EGFR therapy response. We demonstrated a decrease in vascularization in the responding primary tumours and non-significant variable development of vascularization in non-responding tumours. KEY POINTS: • Dual-phase DE-CT is feasible for vascularization assessment of NSCLC with anti-EGFR therapy. • There was a significant decrease of iodine uptake in responding tumours. • There was a non-significant and variable development in non-responding tumours. • There was significant difference of AEF percentage change between responders and non-responders.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship of dual-phase dual-energy CT (DE-CT) and tumour size in the evaluation of the response to anti-EGFR therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Dual-phase DE-CT was performed in 31 patients with NSCLC before the onset of anti-EGFR (erlotinib) therapy and as follow-up (mean 8 weeks). Iodine uptake (IU; mg/mL) was quantified using prototype software in arterial and venous phases; arterial enhancement fraction (AEF) was calculated. The change of IU before and after therapy onset was compared with anatomical evaluation in maximal transverse diameter and volume (responders vs. non-responders). RESULTS: A significant decrease of IU in venous phase was proved in responders according to all anatomical parameters (p=0.002-0.016). In groups of non-responders, a significant change of IU was not proved with variable trends of development. The most significant change was observed using the anatomical parameter of volume (cut-off 73 %). A significant difference of percentage change in AEF was proved between responding and non-responders (p=0.019-0.043). CONCLUSION: Dual-phase DE-CT with iodine uptake quantification is a feasible method with potential benefit in advanced assessment of anti-EGFR therapy response. We demonstrated a decrease in vascularization in the responding primary tumours and non-significant variable development of vascularization in non-responding tumours. KEY POINTS: • Dual-phase DE-CT is feasible for vascularization assessment of NSCLC with anti-EGFR therapy. • There was a significant decrease of iodine uptake in responding tumours. • There was a non-significant and variable development in non-responding tumours. • There was significant difference of AEF percentage change between responders and non-responders.
Authors: Giovenzio Genestreti; Francesco Grossi; Carlo Genova; Marco A Burgio; Alberto Bongiovanni; Giampaolo Gavelli; Marco Bartolotti; Monica Di Battista; Giovanna Cavallo; Alba A Brandes Journal: Future Oncol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 3.404
Authors: Michael Toepker; Thomas Moritz; Bernhard Krauss; Michael Weber; Gordon Euller; Thomas Mang; Florian Wolf; Christian J Herold; Helmut Ringl Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Marcello Tiseo; Massimo Ippolito; Maura Scarlattei; Pietro Spadaro; Sebastiano Cosentino; Fiorenza Latteri; Livia Ruffini; Marco Bartolotti; Beatrice Bortesi; Claudia Fumarola; Cristina Caffarra; Andrea Cavazzoni; Roberta R Alfieri; Pier Giorgio Petronini; Roberto Bordonaro; Paolo Bruzzi; Andrea Ardizzoni; Hector J Soto Parra Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2013-11-21 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Ahmed M Tawfik; A A Razek; J Matthias Kerl; N E Nour-Eldin; Ralf Bauer; Thomas J Vogl Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: K Hellbach; A Sterzik; W Sommer; M Karpitschka; N Hummel; J Casuscelli; M Ingrisch; M Schlemmer; A Graser; Michael Staehler Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Simon S Martin; Franziska Trapp; Julian L Wichmann; Moritz H Albrecht; Lukas Lenga; James Durden; Christian Booz; Thomas J Vogl; Tommaso D'Angelo Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andrea Agostini; Usman Mahmood; Yusuf Erdi; Alessandra Borgheresi; Monica Ragucci; Peter Sawan; Davinia Ryan; Maria Elena Laino; Giuseppe Corrias; Lorenzo Mannelli Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2018 Mar/Apr Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Dominik Alexander Hering; Kai Kröger; Ralf W Bauer; Hans Theodor Eich; Uwe Haverkamp Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 3.039