Literature DB >> 30478409

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of anti-EGFRvIII chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Sumei Wang1, Donald M O'Rourke2, Sanjeev Chawla1, Gaurav Verma1, MacLean P Nasrallah3, Jennifer J D Morrissette4, Gabriela Plesa5, Carl H June5, Steven Brem2, Eileen Maloney2, Arati Desai6, Ronald L Wolf1, Harish Poptani1,7, Suyash Mohan8.   

Abstract

EGFRvIII targeted chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy has recently been reported for treating glioblastomas (GBMs); however, physiology-based MRI parameters have not been evaluated in this setting. Ten patients underwent multiparametric MRI at baseline, 1, 2 and 3 months after CAR-T therapy. Logistic regression model derived progression probabilities (PP) using imaging parameters were used to assess treatment response. Four lesions from "early surgery" group demonstrated high PP at baseline suggestive of progression, which was confirmed histologically. Out of eight lesions from remaining six patients, three lesions with low PP at baseline remained stable. Two lesions with high PP at baseline were associated with large decreases in PP reflecting treatment response, whereas other two lesions with high PP at baseline continued to demonstrate progression. One patient didn't have baseline data but demonstrated progression on follow-up. Our findings indicate that multiparametric MRI may be helpful in monitoring CAR-T related early therapeutic changes in GBM patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30478409      PMCID: PMC6325110          DOI: 10.1038/s41416-018-0342-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


Introduction

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults with poor prognosis. Recurrence is almost inevitable and the median survival for these recurrent patients is only 6.6–9.6 months.[1] Epidermal growth factor receptor variant III (EGFRvIII) is expressed in about one third of GBM patients, promotes oncogenesis and is associated with poor prognosis.[2,3] A recent study demonstrated successful synthesis, delivery, and acceptable safety profile of chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy targeting against EGFRvIII epitope in patients with recurrent GBM.[4] Since immunotherapy including CAR-T therapy, triggers patient’s immune system to fight cancer cells, a pronounced inflammatory response occurs within the tumour bed,[5] complicating the appearance on conventional MRI for evaluation of therapeutic response. Multiparametric analysis using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI),[6] dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion imaging[7] and proton MR spectroscopy[8] have been reported to distinguish true progression (TP) from pseudo-progression (PsP) with high accuracy.[6,9] This rationale formed the basis of this study in which treatment response of CART-EGFRvIII immunotherapy in recurrent GBMs was evaluated using DTI, DSC and spectroscopic imaging.

Methods

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. Informed consent was obtained from all patients. Ten recurrent GBM patients (5M/5F, mean age, 60.56 ± 10.31 years) were included based on inclusion criteria (Supplementary Material). Clinical/demographic information, EGFRvIII expression levels and overall survival (OS) were described in Table S1. Baseline images were acquired within one week before CAR-T cell infusion. Tumour progression was determined based on a combination of clinical status and RANO criteria. Seven of 10 patients underwent resection after demonstrating progression following CAR-T cell infusion. Patients were divided into three groups according to the time of repeat surgery after CAR-T cell infusion: (1) no surgery (no surgery group, n = 3); (2) surgery within a month (early surgery group, n = 4); (3) surgery over a month (late surgery group, n = 3) (Table S1). Data acquisition/analysis of DTI, DSC and 3-D echo planar spectroscopic imaging (3D-EPSI) sequences were performed as previously described.[6,8,10] All contrast enhancing lesions (n = 12) ≥ 1 cm3 were selected for quantitative analysis. A semi-automatic segmentation approach was used to generate a mask from the enhancing region of the neoplasm (Supplementary Material). The enhancing and central non-enhancing regions were used to compute tumour volume. Mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), linear anisotropy (CL), planar anisotropy (CP), spherical anisotropy (CS), relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) and choline/creatine (Cho/Cr) ratio from enhancing lesions were estimated at each time point. Percent changes for each parameter between baseline and subsequent scans (N) were calculated as (N – baseline)/baseline × 100 for the non-surgery and late surgery groups. Baseline 3D-EPSI data were available from two lesions in one patient. Hence, percentage changes in Cho/Cr from these two lesions were also evaluated. In our previous study,[6] for patients who underwent surgery and chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and exhibited new enhancing lesions on follow-up imaging within six months, a combination of FA, CL and rCBVmax was reported to be the best model in differentiating PsP from TP with high accuracy (AUC 0.91). This model was determined based on the histological analysis of surgical samples. Therefore, these three parameters were used in this study to compute the progression probabilities (PP) of tumour progression of each lesion at each time point using the following regression equation[6]:where β0 = −16.17, β1 = 194.01, β2 = −285.65, and β3 = 1.21. Lesions were considered TP (predominant viable tumour) if the predictive PP was ≥ 50% and PsP (predominant treatment effects) if predictive PP was ≤ 50%. In order to evaluate CAR-T treatment efficacy, we included 10 recurrent GBM patients without CAR-T therapy (Table S2) and calculated PP values. OS was measured from the date of diagnosis and CAR-T cell infusion to the date of death for deceased patients, or the date of last clinical follow-up for surviving patients.

Results

Three out of 10 patients died within 6 months after CAR-T cell infusion. Six patients survived > 6 months before succumbing to the disease. One patient (209) was still alive at the time of the writing of this manuscript with a survival of 34.0 months (1033 days). Median OS from all 10 patients was 247 days (Table S1). Serial anatomical images, parametric maps and histologic findings from patient 209 at baseline and follow-up periods are shown in Figure S1. Baseline imaging parameters and PP obtained using the classification model for the three groups are presented in Table 1. Percentage changes in tumour volume and imaging parameters at follow-up periods in comparison to baseline are shown in Fig. 1a. Six out of eight lesions demonstrated increased tumour volume at follow-up periods relative to baseline.
Table 1

Baseline imaging parameters and progression probabilities (PP) (mean ± standard deviation)

ParametersEarly surgeryLater surgeryNo surgery
rCBV1.84 ± 0.64 (4)2.02 ± 0.65 (5)1.86 ± 0.30 (3)
rCBVmax3.78 ± 1.14 (4)3.95 ± 1.47 (5)3.36 ± 0.82 (3)
MD (× 10−3 mm2/s)1.19 ± 0.83 (4)1.23 ± 0.23 (5)1.41 ± 0.24 (3)
FA0.16 ± 0.02 (4)0.14 ± 0.05 (5)0.13 ± 0.02 (2)
CL0.06 ± 0.00 (4)0.05 ± 0.03 (5)0.08 ± 0.06 (2)
CP0.09 ± 0.00 (4)0.07 ± 0.02 (5)0.07 ± 0.00 (2)
CS0.85 ± 0.01 (4)0.87 ± 0.04 (5)0.83 ± 0.05 (2)
Cho/Cr0.39 ± 0.03 (3)0.41 ± 0.01 (2)
PP0.92 ± 0.13 (4)0.57 ± 0.51 (5)0.04 ± 0.63 (2)

The number of lesions included in each parameter are indicated in parenthesis

Fig. 1

Percent changes of MR parameters and tumour volume after CAR-T treatment for eight lesions in six patients (a). Baseline and follow-up MRSI data was only available for two lesions to compute the percent changes. Changes of progression probabilities (PP) using the predictive model for eight lesions in six patients (b). Changes of PP in 10  recurrent GBM patients without CAR-T therapy (c). The probability of true progression is 50–100% whereas the probability of pseudo-progression is 0–50%

Baseline imaging parameters and progression probabilities (PP) (mean ± standard deviation) The number of lesions included in each parameter are indicated in parenthesis Percent changes of MR parameters and tumour volume after CAR-T treatment for eight lesions in six patients (a). Baseline and follow-up MRSI data was only available for two lesions to compute the percent changes. Changes of progression probabilities (PP) using the predictive model for eight lesions in six patients (b). Changes of PP in 10  recurrent GBM patients without CAR-T therapy (c). The probability of true progression is 50–100% whereas the probability of pseudo-progression is 0–50% The enhancing lesions from four patients in “early surgery” group demonstrated high PP (72–99%) and were classified as progressive disease. These four patients underwent repeat surgery within a month following CAR-T cell infusion and were excluded from longitudinal analysis. Histopathological findings confirmed the diagnosis of TP in these patients. For remaining six patients (total of eight lesions), three lesions (204, 205 and 209 L2) with low PP at baseline remained stable at follow-up. Two lesions (202, 209 L1) initially with high PP at baseline were associated with large decreases in PP and were classified as PsP at follow-up. The remaining two lesions (207 L1 and L2) with high PP at baseline continued to demonstrate aggressive imaging features at follow-up. No baseline data was available for patient 201. However, this patient showed features of TP at follow-up. Predicted PP values at baseline and follow-up periods are shown in Table S3. The plots of these predictive PPs are shown in Fig. 1b. Predicted PPs obtained from our classification model were confirmed on histopathology for all patients in the early and late surgery groups. Predicted PPs for recurrent GBMs without CAR-T therapy are shown in Table S4 and Fig. 1c. Eight patients showed increased PP at follow-up time points.

Discussion

We used a predictive model from multiparametric MRI to assess the behaviour of neoplastic lesions following anti-EGFR CAR-T cell immunotherapy. All patients with available histopathology were correctly predicted as TP or PsP, indicating utility of multiparametric MRI in evaluating therapeutic response to CAR-T cell immunotherapy. Harnessing of immune response involves inflammatory sequelae that complicates conventional MRI appearance and limits the use of RANO criteria. As immunotherapies enter clinical trials for treating GBM, there is an urgent need to reliably assess the efficacy of these treatment modalities in detecting elusive disease and redefining response.[5] Multiparametric MRI has been widely used to predict treatment response in GBM patients.[6-8] When percent changes in individual imaging parameters were assessed from enhancing lesions at different follow-up periods relative to baseline, no definite trends were observed, indicating that imaging parameters, in isolation, may have a limited role in assessing heterogeneity of treatment response to EGFRvIII CAR-T cell therapy. However, when we used the PP derived from multiparametric MRI, we were able to objectively characterise each lesion as either progression or response at each individual time point, suggesting that a multiparametric approach may allow more accurate characterisation of treatment response in GBM patients treated with immune/targeted therapies. These results need to be validated in a larger patient cohort and correlated with clinical endpoints of progression free survival and OS. Supplemental Material Supplementary Table S1 Supplementary Table S2 Supplementary Table S3 Supplementary Table S4 Supplementary Figure S1
  10 in total

1.  Detection of immune responses after immunotherapy in glioblastoma using PET and MRI.

Authors:  Joseph P Antonios; Horacio Soto; Richard G Everson; Diana L Moughon; Anthony C Wang; Joey Orpilla; Caius Radu; Benjamin M Ellingson; Jason T Lee; Timothy Cloughesy; Michael E Phelps; Johannes Czernin; Linda M Liau; Robert M Prins
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Rational development and characterization of humanized anti-EGFR variant III chimeric antigen receptor T cells for glioblastoma.

Authors:  Laura A Johnson; John Scholler; Takayuki Ohkuri; Akemi Kosaka; Prachi R Patel; Shannon E McGettigan; Arben K Nace; Tzvete Dentchev; Pramod Thekkat; Andreas Loew; Alina C Boesteanu; Alexandria P Cogdill; Taylor Chen; Joseph A Fraietta; Christopher C Kloss; Avery D Posey; Boris Engels; Reshma Singh; Tucker Ezell; Neeraja Idamakanti; Melissa H Ramones; Na Li; Li Zhou; Gabriela Plesa; John T Seykora; Hideho Okada; Carl H June; Jennifer L Brogdon; Marcela V Maus
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 17.956

3.  Differentiation between glioblastomas, solitary brain metastases, and primary cerebral lymphomas using diffusion tensor and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  S Wang; S Kim; S Chawla; R L Wolf; D E Knipp; A Vossough; D M O'Rourke; K D Judy; H Poptani; E R Melhem
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  A single dose of peripherally infused EGFRvIII-directed CAR T cells mediates antigen loss and induces adaptive resistance in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Authors:  Donald M O'Rourke; MacLean P Nasrallah; Arati Desai; Jan J Melenhorst; Keith Mansfield; Jennifer J D Morrissette; Maria Martinez-Lage; Steven Brem; Eileen Maloney; Angela Shen; Randi Isaacs; Suyash Mohan; Gabriela Plesa; Simon F Lacey; Jean-Marc Navenot; Zhaohui Zheng; Bruce L Levine; Hideho Okada; Carl H June; Jennifer L Brogdon; Marcela V Maus
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 17.956

5.  Differentiating Tumor Progression from Pseudoprogression in Patients with Glioblastomas Using Diffusion Tensor Imaging and Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MRI.

Authors:  S Wang; M Martinez-Lage; Y Sakai; S Chawla; S G Kim; M Alonso-Basanta; R A Lustig; S Brem; S Mohan; R L Wolf; A Desai; H Poptani
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 6.  Recurrent glioma clinical trial, CheckMate-143: the game is not over yet.

Authors:  Anna C Filley; Mario Henriquez; Mahua Dey
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-10-06

7.  Three-dimensional echo planar spectroscopic imaging for differentiation of true progression from pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma.

Authors:  Gaurav Verma; Sanjeev Chawla; Suyash Mohan; Sumei Wang; MacLean Nasrallah; Sulaiman Sheriff; Arati Desai; Steven Brem; Donald M O'Rourke; Ronald L Wolf; Andrew A Maudsley; Harish Poptani
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 4.044

Review 8.  Pitfalls in the neuroimaging of glioblastoma in the era of antiangiogenic and immuno/targeted therapy - detecting illusive disease, defining response.

Authors:  Raymond Y Huang; Martha R Neagu; David A Reardon; Patrick Y Wen
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2015-02-23       Impact factor: 4.003

9.  EGFRvIII-specific chimeric antigen receptor T cells migrate to and kill tumor deposits infiltrating the brain parenchyma in an invasive xenograft model of glioblastoma.

Authors:  Hongsheng Miao; Bryan D Choi; Carter M Suryadevara; Luis Sanchez-Perez; Shicheng Yang; Gabriel De Leon; Elias J Sayour; Roger McLendon; James E Herndon; Patrick Healy; Gary E Archer; Darell D Bigner; Laura A Johnson; John H Sampson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-10       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Commentary: Pitfalls in the Neuroimaging of Glioblastoma in the Era of Antiangiogenic and Immuno/Targeted Therapy.

Authors:  Aaron D Skolnik; Sumei Wang; Pallavi P Gopal; Suyash Mohan
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 4.003

  10 in total
  9 in total

Review 1.  Metabolic and physiologic magnetic resonance imaging in distinguishing true progression from pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma.

Authors:  Sanjeev Chawla; Sultan Bukhari; Omar M Afridi; Sumei Wang; Santosh K Yadav; Hamed Akbari; Gaurav Verma; Kavindra Nath; Mohammad Haris; Stephen Bagley; Christos Davatzikos; Laurie A Loevner; Suyash Mohan
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 4.478

2.  Safety and Efficacy of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy for Glioblastoma: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jong Keon Jang; Junhee Pyo; Chong Hyun Suh; Hye Sun Park; Young Kwang Chae; Kyung Won Kim
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 5.738

Review 3.  Emerging MRI Techniques to Redefine Treatment Response in Patients With Glioblastoma.

Authors:  Fabrício Guimarães Gonçalves; Sanjeev Chawla; Suyash Mohan
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 4.  Physiological Imaging Methods for Evaluating Response to Immunotherapies in Glioblastomas.

Authors:  Sanjeev Chawla; Vanessa Shehu; Pradeep K Gupta; Kavindra Nath; Harish Poptani
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Imaging Biomarkers of Glioblastoma Treatment Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Recent Machine Learning Studies.

Authors:  Thomas C Booth; Mariusz Grzeda; Alysha Chelliah; Andrei Roman; Ayisha Al Busaidi; Carmen Dragos; Haris Shuaib; Aysha Luis; Ayesha Mirchandani; Burcu Alparslan; Nina Mansoor; Jose Lavrador; Francesco Vergani; Keyoumars Ashkan; Marc Modat; Sebastien Ourselin
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 6.  Emerging MR Imaging and Spectroscopic Methods to Study Brain Tumor Metabolism.

Authors:  Manoj Kumar; Ravi Prakash Reddy Nanga; Gaurav Verma; Neil Wilson; Jean Christophe Brisset; Kavindra Nath; Sanjeev Chawla
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 7.  Molecular Pathogenesis of Glioblastoma in Adults and Future Perspectives: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Yagmur Esemen; Mariam Awan; Rabeeia Parwez; Arsalan Baig; Shahinur Rahman; Ilaria Masala; Sonia Franchini; Dimitrios Giakoumettis
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-02-26       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 8.  MRI techniques for immunotherapy monitoring.

Authors:  Doreen Lau; Pippa G Corrie; Ferdia A Gallagher
Journal:  J Immunother Cancer       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 12.469

9.  Multiparametric MRI assessment of response to convection-enhanced intratumoral delivery of MDNA55, an interleukin-4 receptor targeted immunotherapy, for recurrent glioblastoma.

Authors:  Suyash Mohan; Sumei Wang; Sanjeev Chawla; Kalil Abdullah; Arati Desai; Eileen Maloney; Steven Brem
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-07-06
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.