Utility of clinical and MR imaging parameters for prediction and monitoring of response to capecitabine and temozolomide (CAPTEM) therapy in patients with liver metastases of neuroendocrine tumors
Maria Ingenerf, Christoph Auernhammer, Roberto Lorbeer, Michael Winkelmann, Shiwa Mansournia, Nabeel Mansour, Nina Hesse, Kathrin Heinrich, Jens Ricke, Frank Berger, Christine Schmid-Tannwald
{"title":"Utility of clinical and MR imaging parameters for prediction and monitoring of response to capecitabine and temozolomide (CAPTEM) therapy in patients with liver metastases of neuroendocrine tumors","authors":"Maria Ingenerf, Christoph Auernhammer, Roberto Lorbeer, Michael Winkelmann, Shiwa Mansournia, Nabeel Mansour, Nina Hesse, Kathrin Heinrich, Jens Ricke, Frank Berger, Christine Schmid-Tannwald","doi":"10.2478/raon-2024-0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background This study explores the predictive and monitoring capabilities of clinical and multiparametric MR parameters in assessing capecitabine and temozolomide (CAPTEM) therapy response in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Patients and methods This retrospective study (n = 44) assessed CAPTEM therapy response in neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) patients. Among 33 monitored patients, as a subgroup of the overall study cohort, pretherapeutic and follow-up MRI data (size, apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC] values, and signal intensities), along with clinical parameters (chromogranin A [CgA] and Ki-67%), were analyzed. Progression-free survival (PFS) served as the reference. Responders were defined as those with PFS ≥ 6 months. Results Most patients were male (75%) and had G2 tumors (76%) with a pancreatic origin (84%). Median PFS was 5.7 months; Overall Survival (OS) was 25 months. Non-responders (NR) had higher Ki-67 in primary tumors (16.5 <jats:italic>vs</jats:italic>. 10%, p = 0.01) and increased hepatic burden (20% <jats:italic>vs</jats:italic>. 5%, p = 0.007). NR showed elevated CgA post-treatment, while responders (R) exhibited a mild decrease. ADC changes differed significantly between groups, with NR having decreased ADCmin (−23%) and liver-adjusted ADCmean/ADCmean liver (−16%), compared to R’s increases of ADCmin (50%) and ADCmean/ADCmean liver (30%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis identified the highest area under the curve (AUC) (0.76) for a single parameter for ∆ ADC mean/liver ADCmean, with a cut-off of < 6.9 (76% sensitivity, 75% specificity). Combining ∆ Size NELM and ∆ ADCmin achieved the best balance (88% sensitivity, 60% specificity) outperforming ∆ Size NELM alone (69% sensitivity, 65% specificity). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated significantly longer PFS for ∆ ADCmean/ADCmean liver < 6.9 (p = 0.024) and ∆ Size NELM > 0% + ∆ ADCmin < −2.9% (p = 0.021). Conclusions Survival analysis emphasizes the need for adapted response criteria, involving combined evaluation of CgA, ADC values, and tumor size for monitoring CAPTEM response in hepatic metastasized NETs.","PeriodicalId":21034,"journal":{"name":"Radiology and Oncology","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2024-0024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background This study explores the predictive and monitoring capabilities of clinical and multiparametric MR parameters in assessing capecitabine and temozolomide (CAPTEM) therapy response in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Patients and methods This retrospective study (n = 44) assessed CAPTEM therapy response in neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) patients. Among 33 monitored patients, as a subgroup of the overall study cohort, pretherapeutic and follow-up MRI data (size, apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC] values, and signal intensities), along with clinical parameters (chromogranin A [CgA] and Ki-67%), were analyzed. Progression-free survival (PFS) served as the reference. Responders were defined as those with PFS ≥ 6 months. Results Most patients were male (75%) and had G2 tumors (76%) with a pancreatic origin (84%). Median PFS was 5.7 months; Overall Survival (OS) was 25 months. Non-responders (NR) had higher Ki-67 in primary tumors (16.5 vs. 10%, p = 0.01) and increased hepatic burden (20% vs. 5%, p = 0.007). NR showed elevated CgA post-treatment, while responders (R) exhibited a mild decrease. ADC changes differed significantly between groups, with NR having decreased ADCmin (−23%) and liver-adjusted ADCmean/ADCmean liver (−16%), compared to R’s increases of ADCmin (50%) and ADCmean/ADCmean liver (30%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis identified the highest area under the curve (AUC) (0.76) for a single parameter for ∆ ADC mean/liver ADCmean, with a cut-off of < 6.9 (76% sensitivity, 75% specificity). Combining ∆ Size NELM and ∆ ADCmin achieved the best balance (88% sensitivity, 60% specificity) outperforming ∆ Size NELM alone (69% sensitivity, 65% specificity). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated significantly longer PFS for ∆ ADCmean/ADCmean liver < 6.9 (p = 0.024) and ∆ Size NELM > 0% + ∆ ADCmin < −2.9% (p = 0.021). Conclusions Survival analysis emphasizes the need for adapted response criteria, involving combined evaluation of CgA, ADC values, and tumor size for monitoring CAPTEM response in hepatic metastasized NETs.
期刊介绍:
Radiology and Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal devoted to the publishing original and high quality scientific papers and review articles, pertinent to diagnostic and interventional radiology, computerized tomography, magnetic resonance, ultrasound, nuclear medicine, radiotherapy, clinical and experimental oncology, radiobiology, medical physics and radiation protection. Therefore, the scope of the journal is to cover beside radiology the diagnostic and therapeutic aspects in oncology, which distinguishes it from other journals in the field.