Molecular Imaging and Precision Medicine: PET/Computed Tomography and Therapy Response Assessment in Oncology.

A variety of methods have been developed to assess tumor response to therapy. Standardized qualitative criteria based on 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose PET/computed tomography have been proposed to evaluate the treatment effectiveness in specific cancers and these allow more accurate therapy response assessment and survival prognostication. Multiple studies have addressed the utility of the volumetric PET biomarkers as prognostic indicators but there is no consensus about the preferred segmentation methodology for these metrics. Heterogeneous intratumoral uptake was proposed as a novel PET metric for therapy response assessment. PET imaging techniques will be used to study the biological behavior of cancers during therapy.

[1]  M. Hatt,et al.  Intratumor Heterogeneity Characterized by Textural Features on Baseline 18F-FDG PET Images Predicts Response to Concomitant Radiochemotherapy in Esophageal Cancer , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[2]  I. Buvat,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Methods for Estimating Tumor Volume and Standardized Uptake Value in 18F-FDG PET , 2010, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[3]  B. Cheson.  Staging and response assessment in lymphomas: the new Lugano classification. , 2015, Chinese clinical oncology.

[4]  Soo Hyun Kwon,et al.  Prognostic significance of the intratumoral heterogeneity of 18F‐FDG uptake in oral cavity cancer , 2014, Journal of surgical oncology.

[5]  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.

[6]  C. Mathers,et al.  Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012 , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[7]  Rebecca L. Siegel Mph,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2016 , 2016 .

[8]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2016 , 2016, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[9]  Axel Hoos,et al.  Guidelines for the Evaluation of Immune Therapy Activity in Solid Tumors: Immune-Related Response Criteria , 2009, Clinical Cancer Research.

[10]  P. A. Futreal,et al.  Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  A. Scarsbrook,et al.  FDG PET/CT in oncology: "raising the bar". , 2010, Clinical radiology.

[12]  S. Houshmand,et al.  Role of Optimal Quantification of FDG PET Imaging in the Clinical Practice of Radiology. , 2016, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[13]  S. Zwas,et al.  PET/CT in the Evaluation of Response to Treatment of Liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer with Bevacizumab and Irinotecan , 2006, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[14]  Sigrid Stroobants,et al.  Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  G. Parker,et al.  Imaging Intratumor Heterogeneity: Role in Therapy Response, Resistance, and Clinical Outcome , 2014, Clinical Cancer Research.

[16]  M. Aras,et al.  Comparison of WHO, RECIST 1.1, EORTC, and PERCIST criteria in the evaluation of treatment response in malignant solid tumors , 2015, Nuclear medicine communications.

[17]  T. Yen,et al.  Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a parallel study of a prospective randomized trial , 2016, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[18]  R. Wahl,et al.  From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  Dorte Nielsen,et al.  Comparison of EORTC Criteria and PERCIST for PET/CT Response Evaluation of Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated with Irinotecan and Cetuximab , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  Matteo Brunelli,et al.  Differential Activity of Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab and MPDL3280A according to the Tumor Expression of Programmed Death-Ligand-1 (PD-L1): Sensitivity Analysis of Trials in Melanoma, Lung and Genitourinary Cancers , 2015, PloS one.

[21]  S. Sheikhbahaei,et al.  18F-FDG PET/CT: Therapy Response Assessment Interpretation (Hopkins Criteria) and Survival Outcomes in Lung Cancer Patients , 2016, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  Michel Meignan,et al.  Report on the First International Workshop on interim-PET scan in lymphoma , 2009, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[23]  A. Rahmim,et al.  18F-FDG-PET/CT therapy assessment of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: impact on management and utilization of quantitative parameters for patient survival prediction , 2015, Nuclear medicine communications.

[24]  L. Mortelmans,et al.  Hodgkin lymphoma: Response assessment by Revised International Workshop Criteria , 2007, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[25]  M. Amonkar,et al.  Cost and economic burden of adverse events associated with metastatic melanoma treatments in five countries , 2016, Journal of medical economics.

[26]  A. Ogunniyi,et al.  Current Status and Future Directions of the Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Ipilimumab, Pembrolizumab, and Nivolumab in Oncology , 2015, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[27]  D. Schadendorf,et al.  Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  X. Ling,et al.  Comparison of RECIST, EORTC criteria and PERCIST for evaluation of early response to chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer , 2016, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[29]  Nobhojit Roy,et al.  The Global Burden of Cancer 2013. , 2015, JAMA oncology.

[30]  Simon Wan,et al.  Tumor Heterogeneity and Permeability as Measured on the CT Component of PET/CT Predict Survival in Patients with Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2013, Clinical Cancer Research.

[31]  Vicky Goh,et al.  Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Erlotinib: Heterogeneity of (18)F-FDG Uptake at PET-Association with Treatment Response and Prognosis. , 2015, Radiology.

[32]  A. Gallamini,et al.  Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Oncology , 2014, Cancers.

[33]  Klemens Scheidhauer,et al.  Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[34]  D. O’Connell,et al.  Validation of metabolic tumor volume as a prognostic factor for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary surgery. , 2016, Oral oncology.

[35]  M. Schwaiger,et al.  Textural Parameters of Tumor Heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT for Therapy Response Assessment and Prognosis in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[36]  Chun-Ta Liao,et al.  Textural Features of Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT Images: Prognostic Significance in Patients with Advanced T-Stage Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[37]  S. Ben-Haim,et al.  18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in the Evaluation of Cancer Treatment Response* , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[38]  Thomas Carlier,et al.  State-Of-The-Art and Recent Advances in Quantification for Therapeutic Follow-Up in Oncology Using PET , 2015, Front. Med..

[39]  M. Soussan,et al.  Relationship between Tumor Heterogeneity Measured on FDG-PET/CT and Pathological Prognostic Factors in Invasive Breast Cancer , 2014, PloS one.

[40]  B. Sorensen,et al.  Metabolic tumor burden as marker of outcome in advanced EGFR wild-type NSCLC patients treated with erlotinib. , 2016, Lung cancer.

[41]  Vicky Goh,et al.  Quantifying tumour heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging by texture analysis , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[42]  F. Bozza,et al.  Staging of locally advanced breast cancer and the prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: complementary role of scintimammography and 18F-FDG PET/CT. , 2014, The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology (IAR), [and] Section of the Society of....

[43]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Role of FDG PET/CT in assessing response to targeted therapy in metastatic lung cancers: Morphological versus metabolic criteria , 2015, Indian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India.

[44]  J. Vose,et al.  Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[45]  Heiko Schöder,et al.  Imaging for Staging and Response Assessment in Lymphoma. , 2015, Radiology.

[46]  Dong Soo Lee,et al.  Prognostic Value of Metabolic Tumor Volume and Total Lesion Glycolysis in Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[47]  Florent Tixier,et al.  Visual Versus Quantitative Assessment of Intratumor 18F-FDG PET Uptake Heterogeneity: Prognostic Value in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[48]  Vahid Yaghmai,et al.  Radiologic assessment of response to therapy: comparison of RECIST Versions 1.1 and 1.0. , 2011, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[49]  D. Bumann,et al.  Whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosis of residual mass in patients with lymphoma. , 1997, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[50]  F. Lordick,et al.  Immunotherapy of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis with the Antibody Catumaxomab in Colon, Gastric, or Pancreatic Cancer: An Open-Label, Multicenter, Phase I/II Trial , 2011, Oncology Research and Treatment.

[51]  H. Oppel-Heuchel,et al.  Renaissance der Immunonkologie bei urologischen Tumoren , 2016, Der Urologe.

[52]  H. Klomp,et al.  Tumor heterogeneity on (18)F-FDG-PET/CT for response monitoring in non-small cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib. , 2016, Journal of thoracic disease.

[53]  R. Wahl,et al.  Head and Neck PET/CT: Therapy Response Interpretation Criteria (Hopkins Criteria)—Interreader Reliability, Accuracy, and Survival Outcomes , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[54]  Ralph A Bundschuh,et al.  Textural features in pre-treatment [F18]-FDG-PET/CT are correlated with risk of local recurrence and disease-specific survival in early stage NSCLC patients receiving primary stereotactic radiation therapy , 2015, Radiation oncology.

[55]  Dong Soo Lee,et al.  Recent Trends in PET Image Interpretations Using Volumetric and Texture-based Quantification Methods in Nuclear Oncology , 2014, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.