Validation of diffusion MRI phenotypes for predicting response to bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma: post-hoc analysis of the EORTC-26101 trial.
ADC
bevacizumab
histogram analysis
prognostic vs predictive
recurrent glioblastoma
Journal
Neuro-oncology
ISSN: 1523-5866
Titre abrégé: Neuro Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100887420
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 11 2020
26 11 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
13
5
2020
medline:
17
3
2021
entrez:
13
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study validated a previously described diffusion MRI phenotype as a potential predictive imaging biomarker in patients with recurrent glioblastoma receiving bevacizumab (BEV). A total of 396/596 patients (66%) from the prospective randomized phase II/III EORTC-26101 trial (with n = 242 in the BEV and n = 154 in the non-BEV arm) met the inclusion criteria with availability of anatomical and diffusion MRI sequences at baseline prior treatment. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histograms from the contrast-enhancing tumor volume were fitted to a double Gaussian distribution and the mean of the lower curve (ADClow) was used for further analysis. The predictive ability of ADClow was assessed with biomarker threshold models and multivariable Cox regression for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). ADClow was associated with PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.625, P = 0.007) and OS (HR = 0.656, P = 0.031). However, no (predictive) interaction between ADClow and the treatment arm was present (P = 0.865 for PFS, P = 0.722 for OS). Independent (prognostic) significance of ADClow was retained after adjusting for epidemiological, clinical, and molecular characteristics (P ≤ 0.02 for OS, P ≤ 0.01 PFS). The biomarker threshold model revealed an optimal ADClow cutoff of 1241*10-6 mm2/s for OS. Thereby, median OS for BEV-patients with ADClow ≥ 1241 was 10.39 months versus 8.09 months for those with ADClow < 1241 (P = 0.004). Similarly, median OS for non-BEV patients with ADClow ≥ 1241 was 9.80 months versus 7.79 months for those with ADClow < 1241 (P = 0.054). ADClow is an independent prognostic parameter for stratifying OS and PFS in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Consequently, the previously suggested role of ADClow as predictive imaging biomarker could not be confirmed within this phase II/III trial.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
This study validated a previously described diffusion MRI phenotype as a potential predictive imaging biomarker in patients with recurrent glioblastoma receiving bevacizumab (BEV).
METHODS
A total of 396/596 patients (66%) from the prospective randomized phase II/III EORTC-26101 trial (with n = 242 in the BEV and n = 154 in the non-BEV arm) met the inclusion criteria with availability of anatomical and diffusion MRI sequences at baseline prior treatment. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histograms from the contrast-enhancing tumor volume were fitted to a double Gaussian distribution and the mean of the lower curve (ADClow) was used for further analysis. The predictive ability of ADClow was assessed with biomarker threshold models and multivariable Cox regression for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).
RESULTS
ADClow was associated with PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.625, P = 0.007) and OS (HR = 0.656, P = 0.031). However, no (predictive) interaction between ADClow and the treatment arm was present (P = 0.865 for PFS, P = 0.722 for OS). Independent (prognostic) significance of ADClow was retained after adjusting for epidemiological, clinical, and molecular characteristics (P ≤ 0.02 for OS, P ≤ 0.01 PFS). The biomarker threshold model revealed an optimal ADClow cutoff of 1241*10-6 mm2/s for OS. Thereby, median OS for BEV-patients with ADClow ≥ 1241 was 10.39 months versus 8.09 months for those with ADClow < 1241 (P = 0.004). Similarly, median OS for non-BEV patients with ADClow ≥ 1241 was 9.80 months versus 7.79 months for those with ADClow < 1241 (P = 0.054).
CONCLUSIONS
ADClow is an independent prognostic parameter for stratifying OS and PFS in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Consequently, the previously suggested role of ADClow as predictive imaging biomarker could not be confirmed within this phase II/III trial.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32393964
pii: 5836012
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noaa120
pmc: PMC7690360
doi:
Substances chimiques
Angiogenesis Inhibitors
0
Bevacizumab
2S9ZZM9Q9V
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase II
Clinical Trial, Phase III
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1667-1676Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Oct 1;27(28):4733-40
pubmed: 19720927
Neuro Oncol. 2015 Sep;17(9):1188-98
pubmed: 26250565
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Nov 20;33(33):3968-71
pubmed: 26392104
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Aug;15(9):943-53
pubmed: 25035291
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Aug;177(2):449-54
pubmed: 11461881
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 28;11(7):e0160250
pubmed: 27467557
Neuro Oncol. 2015 Aug;17(8):1139-47
pubmed: 25754089
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011 May;32(5):882-9
pubmed: 21330401
N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 20;370(8):699-708
pubmed: 24552317
Radiology. 2009 Jul;252(1):182-9
pubmed: 19561256
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Sep 1;33(25):2721-2
pubmed: 26195699
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013 Jan;34(1):E10-1
pubmed: 23275590
J Neurooncol. 2012 Jul;108(3):491-8
pubmed: 22426926
Oncotarget. 2017 May 10;8(35):59492-59499
pubmed: 28938652
Clin Cancer Res. 2016 Dec 1;22(23):5765-5771
pubmed: 27803067
Radiology. 2016 May;279(2):542-52
pubmed: 26579564
Radiology. 2016 Oct;281(1):175-84
pubmed: 27120357
Radiology. 2006 Dec;241(3):839-46
pubmed: 17032910
Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Oct 1;23(19):5745-5756
pubmed: 28655794
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Mar;200(3):624-9
pubmed: 23436853
Radiology. 2007 May;243(2):493-9
pubmed: 17356177
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Sep 1;33(25):2735-44
pubmed: 26124478
J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999 Jan;9(1):53-60
pubmed: 10030650
Eur Radiol. 2004 Mar;14(3):425-30
pubmed: 14618363
N Engl J Med. 2017 Nov 16;377(20):1954-1963
pubmed: 29141164
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):740-5
pubmed: 19114704
J Neurooncol. 2000 Dec;50(3):215-26
pubmed: 11263501
Neurology. 2014 May 13;82(19):1684-92
pubmed: 24727314
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 Apr;35(4):673-9
pubmed: 24136647
N Engl J Med. 2005 Mar 10;352(10):987-96
pubmed: 15758009
Neuroradiology. 2012 Jun;54(6):555-63
pubmed: 21833736
Lancet Oncol. 2019 May;20(5):728-740
pubmed: 30952559
N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 20;370(8):709-22
pubmed: 24552318