Pooja J Sheth1, Spencer Del Moral2, Breelyn A Wilky2, Jonathan C Trent2, Jonathan Cohen3, Andrew E Rosenberg4, H Thomas Temple5, Ty K Subhawong6. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine/Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Avenue, JMH WW 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. 2. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. 3. Oncology and Radiation Associates, 1321 NW 14th Street, Suite 207, Miami, FL, 33125, USA. 4. Department of Pathology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. 5. Center for Orthopedic Innovations, 3659 S. Miami Avenue, Suite 4008, Miami, FL, 33133, USA. 6. Department of Radiology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine/Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Avenue, JMH WW 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. tsubhawong@med.miami.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Imaging criteria for measuring the response of desmoid fibromatosis to systemic therapy are not well established. We evaluated a series of patients with desmoids who underwent systemic therapy to document magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features associated with a positive clinical response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study included 23 patients (mean age 40.5) with 29 extra-abdominal tumors. Therapeutic regimens included cytotoxic chemotherapy (n = 19), targeted therapy (n = 3), and nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS; n = 1). Clinical effects were categorized as progressive disease, stable, or partial response. Maximum tumor dimension (Dmax), approximate tumor volume (VTumor), and quantitative tumor T2 hyperintensity and contrast enhancement (relative to muscle) for pre- and post-treatment MRIs were compared. RESULTS: Three lesions progressed, 5 lesions were stable, whereas 21 showed a clinical response. Dmax decreased more in responders (mean -11.0 %) than in stable/progressive lesions (mean -3.6 and 0 % respectively, p = 0.28, ANOVA); by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) 27 out of 29 lesions were "stable," including the 3 progressive lesions. In responders, VTumor change averaged -29.4 %, but -19.2 % and +32.5 % in stable and progressive lesions respectively (p = 0.002, ANOVA); by 3D criteria 14 out of 29 lesions showed a partial response. T2 hyperintensity decreased by 50-54 % in partial response/stable disease, but only by 10 % in progressive lesions (p = 0.049, t test). Changes in contrast enhancement ranged from -23 % to 0 %, but were not statistically significant among response groups (p = 0.37). Change in T2 hyperintensity showed a positive correlation with volumetric change (r = 0.40). CONCLUSION: Decreases in volume and T2 hyperintensity reflect the positive response of desmoid fibromatosis to systemic therapy; RECIST 1.1 criteria are not sensitive to clinically determined tumor response.
OBJECTIVE: Imaging criteria for measuring the response of desmoid fibromatosis to systemic therapy are not well established. We evaluated a series of patients with desmoids who underwent systemic therapy to document magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features associated with a positive clinical response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study included 23 patients (mean age 40.5) with 29 extra-abdominal tumors. Therapeutic regimens included cytotoxic chemotherapy (n = 19), targeted therapy (n = 3), and nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS; n = 1). Clinical effects were categorized as progressive disease, stable, or partial response. Maximum tumor dimension (Dmax), approximate tumor volume (VTumor), and quantitative tumor T2 hyperintensity and contrast enhancement (relative to muscle) for pre- and post-treatment MRIs were compared. RESULTS: Three lesions progressed, 5 lesions were stable, whereas 21 showed a clinical response. Dmax decreased more in responders (mean -11.0 %) than in stable/progressive lesions (mean -3.6 and 0 % respectively, p = 0.28, ANOVA); by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) 27 out of 29 lesions were "stable," including the 3 progressive lesions. In responders, VTumor change averaged -29.4 %, but -19.2 % and +32.5 % in stable and progressive lesions respectively (p = 0.002, ANOVA); by 3D criteria 14 out of 29 lesions showed a partial response. T2 hyperintensity decreased by 50-54 % in partial response/stable disease, but only by 10 % in progressive lesions (p = 0.049, t test). Changes in contrast enhancement ranged from -23 % to 0 %, but were not statistically significant among response groups (p = 0.37). Change in T2 hyperintensity showed a positive correlation with volumetric change (r = 0.40). CONCLUSION: Decreases in volume and T2 hyperintensity reflect the positive response of desmoid fibromatosis to systemic therapy; RECIST 1.1 criteria are not sensitive to clinically determined tumor response.
Authors: P David Mozley; Claus Bendtsen; Binsheng Zhao; Lawrence H Schwartz; Matthias Thorn; Yuanxin Rong; Luduan Zhang; Andrea Perrone; René Korn; Andrew J Buckler Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 4.243
Authors: Maryam Aghighi; Justin Boe; Jarrett Rosenberg; Rie Von Eyben; Rakhee S Gawande; Philippe Petit; Tarsheen K Sethi; Jeremy Sharib; Neyssa M Marina; Steven G DuBois; Heike E Daldrup-Link Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Peter D Peng; Omar Hyder; Michael N Mavros; Ryan Turley; Ryan Groeschl; Amin Firoozmand; Michael Lidsky; Joseph M Herman; Michael Choti; Nita Ahuja; Robert Anders; Daniel G Blazer; T Clark Gamblin; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-09-13 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Eric A Walker; Jonelle M Petscavage; Pamela L Brian; Chika Iloanusi Logie; Kenneth M Montini; Mark D Murphey Journal: Sarcoma Date: 2012-06-28
Authors: Shivaani Kummar; Geraldine O'Sullivan Coyne; Khanh T Do; Baris Turkbey; Paul S Meltzer; Eric Polley; Peter L Choyke; Robert Meehan; Rasa Vilimas; Yvonne Horneffer; Lamin Juwara; Ann Lih; Amul Choudhary; Sandra A Mitchell; Lee J Helman; James H Doroshow; Alice P Chen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ty K Subhawong; Katharina Feister; Kevin Sweet; Noam Alperin; Deukwoo Kwon; Andrew Rosenberg; Jonathan Trent; Breelyn A Wilky Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2021-07
Authors: M Libertini; I Mitra; W T A van der Graaf; A B Miah; I Judson; R L Jones; K Thomas; E Moskovic; Z Szucs; C Benson; C Messiou Journal: Clin Sarcoma Res Date: 2018-05-14
Authors: Katrina M Ingley; Sally M Burtenshaw; Nicole C Theobalds; Lawrence M White; Martin E Blackstein; Rebecca A Gladdy; Seng Thipphavong; Abha A Gupta Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-07-13 Impact factor: 4.452