Extent of radiological response does not reflect survival in primary central nervous system lymphoma

Abstract Background In primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), small enhancing lesions can persist after treatment. It is unknown whether a difference in response category (complete response [CR], complete response unconfirmed [CRu], or partial response [PR]) reflects survival. We aimed to determine the value of a central radiology review on response assessment and whether the extent of response influenced progression-free and/or overall survival. Methods All patients in the HOVON 105/ALLG NHL 24 study with at least a baseline MRI and one MRI made for response evaluation available for central review were included. Tumor measurements were done by 2 independent central reviewers, disagreements were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Crude agreement and interobserver agreement (Cohen's kappa) were calculated. Differences in progression-free and overall survival between different categories of response at the end-of-protocol-treatment were assessed by the log-rank test in a landmark survival-analysis. Results Agreement between the central reviewers was 61.7% and between local and central response assessment was 63.0%. Cohen's kappa's, which corrects for expected agreement, were 0.44 and 0.46 (moderate), respectively. Progression agreement or not was 93.3% (kappa 0.87) between local and central response assessment. There were no significant differences in progression-free and overall survival between patients with CR, CRu, or PR at the end-of-protocol-treatment, according to both local and central response assessment. Conclusions Reliability of response assessment (CR/CRu/PR) is moderate even by central radiology review and these response categories do not reliably predict survival. Therefore, primary outcome in PCNSL studies should be survival rather than CR or CR/CRu-rate.

[1]  Anne Line Stensjøen,et al.  Volumetric segmentation of glioblastoma progression compared to bidimensional products and clinical radiological reports , 2019, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[2]  S. Heiland,et al.  Automated quantitative tumour response assessment of MRI in neuro-oncology with artificial neural networks: a multicentre, retrospective study. , 2019, The Lancet. Oncology.

[3]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Inter-rater agreement in glioma segmentations on longitudinal MRI , 2019, NeuroImage: Clinical.

[4]  W. Stevens,et al.  Rituximab in patients with primary CNS lymphoma (HOVON 105/ALLG NHL 24): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 intergroup study. , 2019, The Lancet. Oncology.

[5]  K. Hoang-Xuan,et al.  Prognostic value of early 18F-FDG PET scanning evaluation in immunocompetent primary CNS lymphoma patients , 2018, Oncotarget.

[6]  Jong Hoon Kim,et al.  Interim 18F-FGD PET/CT may not predict the outcome in primary central nervous system lymphoma patients treated with sequential treatment with methotrexate and cytarabine , 2017, Annals of Hematology.

[7]  R. Vernhout,et al.  Comparison of 2D (RANO) and volumetric methods for assessment of recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab—a report from the BELOB trial , 2017, Neuro-oncology.

[8]  R. Houot,et al.  Patterns of response and relapse in primary CNS lymphomas after first-line chemotherapy: imaging analysis of the ANOCEF-GOELAMS prospective randomized trial , 2016, Neuro-oncology.

[9]  R. Fisher,et al.  Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  Bruce D Cheson,et al.  Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  John H. Sampson,et al.  A novel, reproducible, and objective method for volumetric magnetic resonance imaging assessment of enhancing glioblastoma. , 2014, Journal of neurosurgery.

[12]  Jong-Hee Chang,et al.  Early response to high-dose methotrexate, vincristine, and procarbazine chemotherapy-adapted strategy for primary CNS lymphoma: no consolidation therapy for patients achieving early complete response , 2014, Annals of Hematology.

[13]  E. Thiel,et al.  High-dose methotrexate with or without whole brain radiotherapy for primary CNS lymphoma (G-PCNSL-SG-1): a phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[14]  Alfons G H Kessels,et al.  Intraobserver and Interobserver Agreement in Volumetric Assessment of Glioblastoma Multiforme Resection , 2010, Neurosurgery.

[15]  R. Fimmers,et al.  Early complete response during chemotherapy predicts favorable outcome in patients with primary CNS lymphoma. , 2010, Neuro-oncology.

[16]  D. Nelson,et al.  Primary central nervous system lymphoma: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center prognostic model. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  E. Thiel,et al.  Primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSL): MRI response criteria revised , 2005, Neurology.

[18]  J. Armitage,et al.  Report of an international workshop to standardize baseline evaluation and response criteria for primary CNS lymphoma. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  F Barkhof,et al.  Interobserver variability in the radiological assessment of response to chemotherapy in glioma , 2003, Neurology.

[20]  J. Blay,et al.  Prognostic scoring system for primary CNS lymphomas: the International Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group experience. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[21]  J R Anderson,et al.  Analysis of survival by tumor response. , 1983, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[22]  Jacob Cohen A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .