Elena A Kaye1, Francois H Cornelis2,3, Elena N Petre2, Neelam Tyagi4, Waleed Shady2,5, Weiji Shi6, Zhigang Zhang6, Stephen B Solomon2, Constantinos T Sofocleous2, Jeremy C Durack2. 1. Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Room S1212B, New York, NY, 10065, USA. kayee@mskcc.org. 2. Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Sorbonne Université -ISCD / APHP - HUEP, Tenon Hospital, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France. 4. Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Room S1212B, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, 216 S Kingshighway Blvd, St. Louis, MO, USA. 6. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to develop and evaluate a volumetric three-dimensional (3D) approach to improve the accuracy of ablation margin assessment following thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. METHODS: The 3D margin assessment technique was developed to generate the new 3D assessment metrics: volumes of insufficient coverage (VICs) measuring volume of tissue at risk post-ablation. VICs were computed for the tumor and tumor plus theoretical 5- and 10-mm margins. The diagnostic accuracy of the 3D assessment to predict 2-year local tumor progression (LTP) was compared to that of manual 2D assessment using retrospective analysis of a patient cohort that has previously been reported as a part of an outcome-centered study. Eighty-six consecutive patients with 108 colorectal cancer liver metastases treated with radiofrequency ablation (2002-2012) were used for evaluation. The 2-year LTP discrimination power was assessed using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS: A 3D assessment of margins was successfully completed for 93 out of 108 tumors. The minimum margin size measured using the 3D method had higher discrimination power compared with the 2D method, with an AUC value of 0.893 vs. 0.790 (p = 0.01). The new 5-mm VIC metric had the highest 2-year LTP discrimination power with an AUC value of 0.923 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Volumetric semi-automated 3D assessment of the ablation zone in the liver is feasible and can improve accuracy of 2-year LTP prediction following thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. KEY POINTS: • More accurate prediction of local tumor progression risk using volumetric 3D ablation zone assessment can help improve the efficacy of image-guided percutaneous thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. • The accuracy of evaluation of ablation zone margins after thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases can be improved using a volumetric 3D semi-automated assessment approach and the volume of insufficient coverage assessment metric. • The new 5-mm volume-of-insufficient-coverage metric, indicating the volume of tumor plus 5-mm margin that remained untreated, had the highest 2-year local tumor progression discrimination power.
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to develop and evaluate a volumetric three-dimensional (3D) approach to improve the accuracy of ablation margin assessment following thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. METHODS: The 3D margin assessment technique was developed to generate the new 3D assessment metrics: volumes of insufficient coverage (VICs) measuring volume of tissue at risk post-ablation. VICs were computed for the tumor and tumor plus theoretical 5- and 10-mm margins. The diagnostic accuracy of the 3D assessment to predict 2-year local tumor progression (LTP) was compared to that of manual 2D assessment using retrospective analysis of a patient cohort that has previously been reported as a part of an outcome-centered study. Eighty-six consecutive patients with 108 colorectal cancer liver metastases treated with radiofrequency ablation (2002-2012) were used for evaluation. The 2-year LTP discrimination power was assessed using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS: A 3D assessment of margins was successfully completed for 93 out of 108 tumors. The minimum margin size measured using the 3D method had higher discrimination power compared with the 2D method, with an AUC value of 0.893 vs. 0.790 (p = 0.01). The new 5-mm VIC metric had the highest 2-year LTP discrimination power with an AUC value of 0.923 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Volumetric semi-automated 3D assessment of the ablation zone in the liver is feasible and can improve accuracy of 2-year LTP prediction following thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. KEY POINTS: • More accurate prediction of local tumor progression risk using volumetric 3D ablation zone assessment can help improve the efficacy of image-guided percutaneous thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. • The accuracy of evaluation of ablation zone margins after thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases can be improved using a volumetric 3D semi-automated assessment approach and the volume of insufficient coverage assessment metric. • The new 5-mm volume-of-insufficient-coverage metric, indicating the volume of tumor plus 5-mm margin that remained untreated, had the highest 2-year local tumor progression discrimination power.
Authors: Xiaodong Wang; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Joseph P Erinjeri; Elena N Petre; Mithat Gonen; Kinh G Do; Karen T Brown; Anne M Covey; Lynn A Brody; William Alago; Raymond H Thornton; Nancy E Kemeny; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Toshifumi Wakai; Yoshio Shirai; Jun Sakata; Vladimir A Valera; Pavel V Korita; Kouhei Akazawa; Yoichi Ajioka; Katsuyoshi Hatakeyama Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2008-07-02 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Emma Loveman; Jeremy Jones; Andrew J Clegg; Joanna Picot; Jillian L Colquitt; Diana Mendes; David J Breen; Emily Moore; Steve George; Graeme Poston; David Cunningham; Theo Ruers; John Primrose Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Martijn R Meijerink; Robbert S Puijk; Aukje A J M van Tilborg; Kirsten Holdt Henningsen; Llenalia Garcia Fernandez; Mattias Neyt; Juanita Heymans; Jacqueline S Frankema; Koert P de Jong; Dick J Richel; Warner Prevoo; Joan Vlayen Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Emily A Knott; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; Sam J Lubner; John F Swietlik; Sharon M Weber; Annie M Zlevor; Colin Longhurst; J Louis Hinshaw; Meghan G Lubner; Daniel L Mulkerin; Daniel E Abbott; Dustin Deming; Noelle K LoConte; Nataliya Uboha; Allison B Couillard; Shane A Wells; Paul F Laeseke; Marci L Alexander; Fred T Lee Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2021-08
Authors: Nikiforos Vasiniotis Kamarinos; Mithat Gonen; Vlasios Sotirchos; Elena Kaye; Elena N Petre; Stephen B Solomon; Joseph P Erinjeri; Etay Ziv; Assen Kirov; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: Int J Hyperthermia Date: 2022 Impact factor: 3.753
Authors: Nikiforos Vasiniotis Kamarinos; Efsevia Vakiani; Sho Fujisawa; Mithat Gonen; Ning Fan; Yevgeniy Romin; Richard K G Do; Etay Ziv; Joseph P Erinjeri; Elena N Petre; Vlasios S Sotirchos; Juan C Camacho; Stephen B Solomon; Katia Manova-Todorova; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 3.682
Authors: Raluca-Maria Sandu; Iwan Paolucci; Simeon J S Ruiter; Raphael Sznitman; Koert P de Jong; Jacob Freedman; Stefan Weber; Pascale Tinguely Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Paul B Shyn; Alan J Cubre; Paul J Catalano; Leslie K Lee; Hyewon Hyun; Kemal Tuncali; Julia G Seol; Vincent M Levesque; Victor H Gerbaudo; Tina Kapur; Ryan T Chao; Stuart G Silverman Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-02-19