| Literature DB >> 32332790 |
Ahmed El Kaffas1,2,3, Assaf Hoogi4, Jianhua Zhou5, Isabelle Durot5, Huaijun Wang5, Jarrett Rosenberg5, Albert Tseng5, Hersh Sagreiya4, Alireza Akhbardeh4, Daniel L Rubin4, Aya Kamaya5,6, Dimitre Hristov7, Jürgen K Willmann5,6.
Abstract
There is a need for noninvasive repeatable biomarkers to detect early cancer treatment response and spare non-responders unnecessary morbidities and costs. Here, we introduce three-dimensional (3D) dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) perfusion map characterization as inexpensive, bedside and longitudinal indicator of tumor perfusion for prediction of vascular changes and therapy response. More specifically, we developed computational tools to generate perfusion maps in 3D of tumor blood flow, and identified repeatable quantitative features to use in machine-learning models to capture subtle multi-parametric perfusion properties, including heterogeneity. Models were developed and trained in mice data and tested in a separate mouse cohort, as well as early validation clinical data consisting of patients receiving therapy for liver metastases. Models had excellent (ROC-AUC > 0.9) prediction of response in pre-clinical data, as well as proof-of-concept clinical data. Significant correlations with histological assessments of tumor vasculature were noted (Spearman R > 0.70) in pre-clinical data. Our approach can identify responders based on early perfusion changes, using perfusion properties correlated to gold-standard vascular properties.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32332790 PMCID: PMC7181711 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-63810-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Schematic of rodent data from LS174T human colon cancers (A, C, D) and CT26 rodent colon cancer (B). Treated animals received Bevacizumab at 10 mg/kg on days 0, 3 and 7. Data set A and B are longitudinally imaged and used as training in the PCA/LDA approach and the GLMNET approach. Data set C is a separate cohort of 20 tumors used for repeatability assessment. Data set D was used as test data acquired separately from the main cohort, and n = 11 out of the 18 animals (5 treated, 6 control) had whole tumor histological assessment of CD31 MVD at 24 hours after treatment. (b) Computational pipeline developed to generate parametric maps and extract features, PCA and develop the LDA model. Additional details on each of these steps is presented in supplementary methods. (c) Representative 3D maps of AUC. Note heterogeneous perfusion in baseline and longitudinally in treated/control groups.
Figure 2(a) Statistics-based feature selection process based on repeatability and sensitivity to treatment. (b) Heatmap showing all features (y-axis) on days 1, 3, 7 and 10 (D01-D10) – features are measured as percent change from baseline. Left is responder (LS174T) group and right is non-responder (CT26) group, with both treated (T) and control (C). (c) Same as D), but after feature selection. Note that within the responder group, there is an oscillation between treated (T) and control (C) animals from day 1 onwards, not observed in non-responder group. (d) ROC for conventional parameters alone (PE, AUC, TP, MTT – thin lines), combined in an LDA model (ROI-LDA; blue) and top 2 components from PCA in an LDA model (PCA-LDA2; red), in the training and test data set. (e) Correlations to histology of conventional parameters (top), LDA scores from conventional parameters (ROI-LDA; top), the first component from the PCA (bottom), and the LDA scores from top 16 PCA components (PCA-LDA1) and top 2 PCA components (PCA-LDA2) (bottom). These are shown as absolute measurements, and not percent change from baseline.
Area under curve (AUC) for ROC analysis to discriminate between responders and non-responders. CI is 95% confidence interval.
| Data Set A/B (Train Data) | Data Set D (Test Data) | Patients (Test Data) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| GLMNET | — | 0.95 (CI: 0.83, 1.00) | 0.97 (CI: 0.82, 1.00) |
| PCA-LDA1 | 0.97 (CI: 0.93, 1.00) | 1.00 (CI: 1,1) | 0.94 (CI: 0.73, 1.00) |
| PCA-LDA2 | 0.96 (CI: 0.91, 1.00) | 0.88 (CI: 0.77, 1.00) | 0.99 (CI: 0.9, 1.00) |
| ROI-LDA (Conventional) | 0.78 (CI: 0.68, 0.87) | 0.66 (CI: 0.40, 0.92) | 0.39 (CI: -0.01, 0.79) |
| PE-LDA | 0.74 (CI: 0.64, 0.83) | 0.76 (CI: 0.53, 0.99) | 0.61 (CI: 0.19, 1.00) |
| AUC-LDA | 0.43 (CI: 0.33, 0.52) | 0.51 (CI: 0.23, 0.79) | 0.28 (CI: -0.08, 0.64) |
| MTT-LDA | 0.62 (CI: 0.51, 0.72) | 0.65 (CI: 0.39, 0.91) | 0.17 (CI: -0.11, 0.45) |
| TP-LDA | 0.43 (CI: 0.33, 0.52) | 0.38 (CI: 0.11, 0.64) | 0 (CI: 0, 0) |
Longitudinal Early Clinical Validation Patient Data.
| Primary Disease | Treatment | Response | Size | Age | Sex |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colorectal Adenocarcinoma | FOLFOX + Bevacizumab | Regression | 9 cm | 60 | M |
| Pancreatic Neuroendocrine | Temozolomide + Capecitabine | Stable | 2.4 cm | 61 | M |
| Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma | Capecitabine + Oxaliplatin | Stable | 1.6 cm | 54 | M |
| Colorectal Adenocarcinoma | Irinotecan + Bevacizumab | Regression | 4.3 cm | 52 | M |
| Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma | Capecitabine + Oxaliplatin | Progression | 2.6 cm | 70 | F |
| Colorectal Adenocarcinoma | RRx-001 | Progression | 2.2 cm | 68 | M |
| Pancreatic Neuroendocrine | Everolimus + Octreotide + Embolization | Progression | 9.5 cm | 52 | M |
| Pancreatic Neuroendocrine | Everolimus | Stable | 2 cm | 54 | F |
| Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma | Gem-Abraxane | Stable | 1.2 cm | 72 | F |
Figure 3Representative 3D volumetric rendering of contrast signal (a), and cross-section AUC parametric maps from responder and non-responder patients before and within 2 weeks after treatment (b). (a) 3D rendering of the AUC parametric map in the volume of interest (VOI). (b) Middle cross section of the VOI in the same order for both patients. Top row images are for patient 6 in Table 2 (Male, 52 y.o., responder), bottom row images are for patient 4 in Table 2 (Male, 68 y.o., non-responder). No significant changes in parametric map appearance is noted in non-responder.