O Humbert1,2, N Cadour3, M Paquet3, R Schiappa4, M Poudenx5, D Chardin3,6, D Borchiellini5,7, D Benisvy3, M J Ouvrier3, C Zwarthoed3, A Schiazza3, M Ilie8, H Ghalloussi5, P M Koulibaly3, J Darcourt3,6, J Otto5. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Université Côte d'Azur (UCA), 33 Avenue de Valombrose, 06189, Nice, France. olivier.humbert@univ-cotedazur.fr. 2. Laboratory Transporter in Imaging and Radiotherapy in Oncology (TIRO), UMR E 4320, CEA, UCA, Nice, France. olivier.humbert@univ-cotedazur.fr. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Université Côte d'Azur (UCA), 33 Avenue de Valombrose, 06189, Nice, France. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, UCA, Nice, France. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, UCA, Nice, France. 6. Laboratory Transporter in Imaging and Radiotherapy in Oncology (TIRO), UMR E 4320, CEA, UCA, Nice, France. 7. Clinical Research and Innovation Office, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, UCA, Nice, France. 8. Laboratory of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Hospital-Integrated Biobank (BB-0033-00025), Nice Hospital University, FHU OncoAge, UCA, Nice, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This prospective study aimed (1) to assess the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) evolutive patterns to immunotherapy using FDG-PET and (2) to describe their association with clinical outcome. DESIGN: Fifty patients with metastatic NSCLC were included before pembrolizumab or nivolumab initiation. FDG-PET scan was performed at baseline and after 7 weeks of treatment (PETinterim1) and different criteria/parameters of tumor response were assessed, including PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST). If a first PERCIST progressive disease (PD) without clinical worsening was observed, treatment was continued and a subsequent FDG-PET (PETinterim2) was performed at 3 months of treatment. Pseudo-progression (PsPD) was defined as a PERCIST response/stability on PETinterim2 after an initial PD. If a second PERCIST PD was assessed on PETinterim2, a homogeneous progression of lesions (termed immune homogeneous progressive-disease: iPDhomogeneous) was distinguished from a heterogeneous evolution (termed immune dissociated-response: iDR). A durable clinical benefit (DCB) of immunotherapy was defined as treatment continuation over a 6-month period. The association between PET evolutive profiles and DCB was assessed. RESULTS: Using PERCIST on PETinterim1, 42% (21/50) of patients showed a response or stable disease, most of them (18/21) reached a DCB. In contrast, 58% (29/50) showed a PD, but more than one-third (11/29) were misclassified as they finally reached a DCB. No standard PETinterim1 criteria could accurately distinguished responding from non-responding patients. Treatment was continued in 19/29 of patients with a first PERCIST PD; the subsequent PETinterim2 demonstrated iPDhomogeneous, iDR and PsPD in 42% (8/19), 26% (5/19), and 32% (6/19), respectively. Whereas no patients with iPDhomogeneous experienced a DCB, all patients with iDR and PsPD reached a clinical benefit to immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: In patients with a first PD on PERCIST and treatment continuation, a subsequent PET identifies more than half of them with iDR and PsPD, both patterns being strongly associated with a clinical benefit of immunotherapy.
PURPOSE: This prospective study aimed (1) to assess the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) evolutive patterns to immunotherapy using FDG-PET and (2) to describe their association with clinical outcome. DESIGN: Fifty patients with metastatic NSCLC were included before pembrolizumab or nivolumab initiation. FDG-PET scan was performed at baseline and after 7 weeks of treatment (PETinterim1) and different criteria/parameters of tumor response were assessed, including PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST). If a first PERCIST progressive disease (PD) without clinical worsening was observed, treatment was continued and a subsequent FDG-PET (PETinterim2) was performed at 3 months of treatment. Pseudo-progression (PsPD) was defined as a PERCIST response/stability on PETinterim2 after an initial PD. If a second PERCIST PD was assessed on PETinterim2, a homogeneous progression of lesions (termed immune homogeneous progressive-disease: iPDhomogeneous) was distinguished from a heterogeneous evolution (termed immune dissociated-response: iDR). A durable clinical benefit (DCB) of immunotherapy was defined as treatment continuation over a 6-month period. The association between PET evolutive profiles and DCB was assessed. RESULTS: Using PERCIST on PETinterim1, 42% (21/50) of patients showed a response or stable disease, most of them (18/21) reached a DCB. In contrast, 58% (29/50) showed a PD, but more than one-third (11/29) were misclassified as they finally reached a DCB. No standard PETinterim1 criteria could accurately distinguished responding from non-responding patients. Treatment was continued in 19/29 of patients with a first PERCIST PD; the subsequent PETinterim2 demonstrated iPDhomogeneous, iDR and PsPD in 42% (8/19), 26% (5/19), and 32% (6/19), respectively. Whereas no patients with iPDhomogeneous experienced a DCB, all patients with iDR and PsPD reached a clinical benefit to immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: In patients with a first PD on PERCIST and treatment continuation, a subsequent PET identifies more than half of them with iDR and PsPD, both patterns being strongly associated with a clinical benefit of immunotherapy.
Authors: Mark Hammer; Stephen Bagley; Charu Aggarwal; Joshua Bauml; Arun C Nachiappan; Charles B Simone; Corey Langer; Sharyn I Katz Journal: Curr Probl Diagn Radiol Date: 2018-01-31
Authors: Bruce D Cheson; Stephen Ansell; Larry Schwartz; Leo I Gordon; Ranjana Advani; Heather A Jacene; Axel Hoos; Sally F Barrington; Philippe Armand Journal: Blood Date: 2016-08-29 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Mizuki Nishino; Nikhil H Ramaiya; Emily S Chambers; Anika E Adeni; Hiroto Hatabu; Pasi A Jänne; F Stephen Hodi; Mark M Awad Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2016-12-20 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: M Hecht; S Semrau; M Beck; J Hartwich; M Eckstein; D Schmidt; A O Gostian; S Müller; S Rutzner; U S Gaipl; J von der Grün; T Illmer; M G Hautmann; G Klautke; J Döscher; T Brunner; B Tamaskovics; A Hartmann; H Iro; T Kuwert; R Fietkau Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 2.258
Authors: David Chardin; Marie Paquet; Renaud Schiappa; Jacques Darcourt; Caroline Bailleux; Michel Poudenx; Aurélie Sciazza; Marius Ilie; Jonathan Benzaquen; Nicolas Martin; Josiane Otto; Olivier Humbert Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Marcus Unterrainer; Michael Ruzicka; Matthias P Fabritius; Lena M Mittlmeier; Michael Winkelmann; Johannes Rübenthaler; Matthias Brendel; Marion Subklewe; Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon; Jens Ricke; Wolfgang G Kunz; Clemens C Cyran Journal: Eur Radiol Exp Date: 2020-11-17