Data sets for the qualification of volumetric CT as a quantitative imaging biomarker in lung cancer.

The drug development industry is faced with increasing costs and decreasing success rates. New ways to understand biology as well as the increasing interest in personalized treatments for smaller patient segments requires new capabilities for the rapid assessment of treatment responses. Deployment of qualified imaging biomarkers lags apparent technology capabilities. The lack of consensus methods and qualification evidence needed for large-scale multi-center trials, as well as the standardization that allows them, are widely acknowledged to be the limiting factors. The current fragmentation in imaging vendor offerings, coupled with the independent activities of individual biopharmaceutical companies and their contract research organizations (CROs), may stand in the way of the greater opportunity were these efforts to be drawn together. A preliminary report, "Volumetric CT: a potential biomarker of response," of the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) activity was presented at the Medical Imaging Continuum: Path Forward for Advancing the Uses of Medical Imaging in the Development of New Biopharmaceutical Products meeting of the Extended Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) Imaging Group sponsored by the Drug Information Agency (DIA) in October 2008. The clinical context in Lung Cancer and a methodology for approaching the qualification of volumetric CT as a biomarker has since been reported [Acad. Radiol. 17, 100-106, 107-115 (2010)]. This report reviews the effort to collect and utilize publicly available data sets to provide a transparent environment in which to pursue the qualification activities in such a way as to allow independent peer review and verification of results. This article focuses specifically on our role as stewards of image sets for developing new tools.

[1]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  A resource for the assessment of lung nodule size estimation methods: database of thoracic CT scans of an anthropomorphic phantom◊ , 2010, Optics express.

[2]  Nicholas Petrick,et al.  Quantitative imaging to assess tumor response to therapy: common themes of measurement, truth data, and error sources. , 2009, Translational oncology.

[3]  Geoffrey McLennan,et al.  Computed tomography assessment of response to therapy: tumor volume change measurement, truth data, and error. , 2009, Translational oncology.

[4]  Binsheng Zhao,et al.  Evaluating variability in tumor measurements from same-day repeat CT scans of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. , 2009, Radiology.

[5]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  Noncalcified lung nodules: volumetric assessment with thoracic CT. , 2009, Radiology.

[6]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  A template-based approach for the analysis of lung nodules in a volumetric CT phantom study , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[7]  L. Schwartz,et al.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). , 2009, European journal of cancer.

[8]  L. Clarke,et al.  Imaging as a Biomarker for Therapy Response: Cancer as a Prototype for the Creation of Research Resources , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[9]  N Petrick,et al.  Imaging as a Tumor Biomarker in Oncology Drug Trials for Lung Cancer: The FDA Perspective , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[10]  L P Clarke,et al.  The Reference Image Database to Evaluate Response to Therapy in Lung Cancer (RIDER) Project: A Resource for the Development of Change‐Analysis Software , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[11]  Ram D. Sriram,et al.  Imaging as a Biomarker: Standards for Change Measurements in Therapy workshop summary. , 2008, Academic radiology.

[12]  Berkman Sahiner,et al.  Effect of CT scanning parameters on volumetric measurements of pulmonary nodules by 3D active contour segmentation: a phantom study. , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  E. V. van Beek,et al.  The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): a comparison of different size metrics for pulmonary nodule measurements. , 2007, Academic radiology.

[14]  L. Constine,et al.  In reply [2] , 2007 .

[15]  Minita Shah,et al.  Volumetric 3D CT analysis - an early predictor of response to therapy , 2007 .

[16]  L. Schwartz,et al.  Lung cancer: computerized quantification of tumor response--initial results. , 2006, Radiology.

[17]  H. Chan,et al.  Accuracy of the CT numbers of simulated lung nodules imaged with multi-detector CT scanners. , 2006, Medical physics.

[18]  Steve Webb,et al.  Quantifying the effect of respiratory motion on lung tumour dosimetry with the aid of a breathing phantom with deforming lungs , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[19]  K. Marten,et al.  Inadequacy of manual measurements compared to automated CT volumetry in assessment of treatment response of pulmonary metastases using RECIST criteria , 2006, European Radiology.

[20]  Ella A. Kazerooni,et al.  Interobserver and Intraobserver Variability in the Assessment of Pulmonary Nodule Size on CT Using Film and Computer Display Methods1 , 2005 .

[21]  G. Chatellier,et al.  Pulmonary nodules: preliminary experience with three-dimensional evaluation. , 2004, Radiology.

[22]  L. Broemeling,et al.  Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  B L Carter,et al.  Use of body scanner in radiotherapy treatment planning , 1977, Cancer.

[24]  J. Hanley,et al.  The effect of measuring error on the results of therapeutic trials in advanced cancer , 1976, Cancer.