Literature DB >> 35914239

MRI-Based Digital Models Forecast Patient-Specific Treatment Responses to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Chengyue Wu1, Angela M Jarrett1,2, Zijian Zhou3, Nabil Elshafeey4, Beatriz E Adrada5, Rosalind P Candelaria5, Rania M M Mohamed5, Medine Boge5, Lei Huo6, Jason B White7, Debu Tripathy7, Vicente Valero7, Jennifer K Litton7, Clinton Yam7, Jong Bum Son3, Jingfei Ma3, Gaiane M Rauch4,5, Thomas E Yankeelov1,2,3,8,9,10.   

Abstract

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is persistently refractory to therapy, and methods to improve targeting and evaluation of responses to therapy in this disease are needed. Here, we integrate quantitative MRI data with biologically based mathematical modeling to accurately predict the response of TNBC to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) on an individual basis. Specifically, 56 patients with TNBC enrolled in the ARTEMIS trial (NCT02276443) underwent standard-of-care doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (A/C) and then paclitaxel for NAST, where dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and diffusion-weighted MRI were acquired before treatment and after two and four cycles of A/C. A biologically based model was established to characterize tumor cell movement, proliferation, and treatment-induced cell death. Two evaluation frameworks were investigated using: (i) images acquired before and after two cycles of A/C for calibration and predicting tumor status after A/C, and (ii) images acquired before, after two cycles, and after four cycles of A/C for calibration and predicting response following NAST. For Framework 1, the concordance correlation coefficients between the predicted and measured patient-specific, post-A/C changes in tumor cellularity and volume were 0.95 and 0.94, respectively. For Framework 2, the biologically based model achieved an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.89 (sensitivity/specificity = 0.72/0.95) for differentiating pathological complete response (pCR) from non-pCR, which is statistically superior (P < 0.05) to the value of 0.78 (sensitivity/specificity = 0.72/0.79) achieved by tumor volume measured after four cycles of A/C. Overall, this model successfully captured patient-specific, spatiotemporal dynamics of TNBC response to NAST, providing highly accurate predictions of NAST response. SIGNIFICANCE: Integrating MRI data with biologically based mathematical modeling successfully predicts breast cancer response to chemotherapy, suggesting digital twins could facilitate a paradigm shift from simply assessing response to predicting and optimizing therapeutic efficacy. ©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35914239      PMCID: PMC9481712          DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-22-1329

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   13.312


  46 in total

1.  Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for predicting pathological response after the first cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  Xia Li; Richard G Abramson; Lori R Arlinghaus; Hakmook Kang; Anuradha Bapsi Chakravarthy; Vandana G Abramson; Jaime Farley; Ingrid A Mayer; Mark C Kelley; Ingrid M Meszoely; Julie Means-Powell; Ana M Grau; Melinda Sanders; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 6.016

2.  Integration of diffusion-weighted MRI data and a simple mathematical model to predict breast tumor cellularity during neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Nkiruka C Atuegwu; Lori R Arlinghaus; Xia Li; E Brian Welch; Bapsi A Chakravarthy; John C Gore; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Mathematical modelling of trastuzumab-induced immune response in an in vivo murine model of HER2+ breast cancer.

Authors:  Angela M Jarrett; Meghan J Bloom; Wesley Godfrey; Anum K Syed; David A Ekrut; Lauren I Ehrlich; Thomas E Yankeelov; Anna G Sorace
Journal:  Math Med Biol       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  DIfferential Subsampling with Cartesian Ordering (DISCO): a high spatio-temporal resolution Dixon imaging sequence for multiphasic contrast enhanced abdominal imaging.

Authors:  Manojkumar Saranathan; Dan W Rettmann; Brian A Hargreaves; Sharon E Clarke; Shreyas S Vasanawala
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 5.  Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging and tumor forecasting of breast cancer patients in the community setting.

Authors:  Angela M Jarrett; Anum S Kazerouni; Chengyue Wu; John Virostko; Anna G Sorace; Julie C DiCarlo; David A Hormuth; David A Ekrut; Debra Patt; Boone Goodgame; Sarah Avery; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 6.  Integrating mechanism-based modeling with biomedical imaging to build practical digital twins for clinical oncology.

Authors:  Chengyue Wu; Guillermo Lorenzo; David A Hormuth; Ernesto A B F Lima; Kalina P Slavkova; Julie C DiCarlo; John Virostko; Caleb M Phillips; Debra Patt; Caroline Chung; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Biophys Rev (Melville)       Date:  2022-05-17

7.  Impact of Machine Learning With Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast for Early Prediction of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Survival Outcomes in Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Amirhessam Tahmassebi; Georg J Wengert; Thomas H Helbich; Zsuzsanna Bago-Horvath; Sousan Alaei; Rupert Bartsch; Peter Dubsky; Pascal Baltzer; Paola Clauser; Panagiotis Kapetas; Elizabeth A Morris; Anke Meyer-Baese; Katja Pinker
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 6.016

8.  Math, magnets, and medicine: enabling personalized oncology.

Authors:  David A Hormuth; Angela M Jarrett; Guillermo Lorenzo; Ernesto A B F Lima; Chengyue Wu; Caroline Chung; Debra Patt; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Expert Rev Precis Med Drug Dev       Date:  2021-01-27

9.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting the response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  John Virostko; Allison Hainline; Hakmook Kang; Lori R Arlinghaus; Richard G Abramson; Stephanie L Barnes; Jeffrey D Blume; Sarah Avery; Debra Patt; Boone Goodgame; Thomas E Yankeelov; Anna G Sorace
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-11-24

10.  Multi-omic machine learning predictor of breast cancer therapy response.

Authors:  Mireia Crispin-Ortuzar; Suet-Feung Chin; Stephen-John Sammut; Elena Provenzano; Helen A Bardwell; Wenxin Ma; Wei Cope; Ali Dariush; Sarah-Jane Dawson; Jean E Abraham; Janet Dunn; Louise Hiller; Jeremy Thomas; David A Cameron; John M S Bartlett; Larry Hayward; Paul D Pharoah; Florian Markowetz; Oscar M Rueda; Helena M Earl; Carlos Caldas
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 69.504

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.