Advanced solid tumors treated with cediranib: Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and CT as markers of vascular activity

Radiology

Volumn 265, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 426-436

  Messiou, Christina ^a,c   Orton, Matthew ^a   Ang, Joo Ern ^b   Collins, David J ^a   Morgan, Veronica A ^a,c   Mears, Dorothy ^c   Castellano, Isabel ^c   Papadatos Pastos, Dionysis ^b   Brunetto, Andre ^b   Tunariu, Nina ^a,c   Mann, Helen ^d   Tessier, Jean ^d   Young, Helen ^d   Ghiorghiu, Dana ^d   Marley, Sarah ^d   Kaye, Stan B ^b   DeBono, Johann S ^b   Leach, Martin O ^a   DeSouza, Nandita M ^a,c  

^a ROYAL MARSDEN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^c INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^d ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AZT 2171; CEDIRANIB; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; IOHEXOL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADULT; AGED; ARTERY; ARTICLE; BLOOD FLOW; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE MARKER; DRUG DOSE REDUCTION; DRUG RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PERMEABILITY; PLASMA VOLUME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; REPRODUCIBILITY; SOLID TUMOR; TUMOR VASCULARIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITORS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IOHEXOL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; NEOVASCULARIZATION, PATHOLOGIC; QUINAZOLINES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84867903840     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112565     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J. RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment. Eur J Cancer 2006;42(8):1031-1039.
2. Bradley DP, Tessier JL, Checkley D, et al. Effects of AZD2171 and vandetanib (ZD6474, Zactima) on haemodynamic variables in an SW620 human colon tumour model: an investigation using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and the rapid clearance blood pool contrast agent, P792 (gadomelitol). NMR Biomed 2008;21(1):42-52. (Pubitemid 351227752)
3. Drevs J, Siegert P, Medinger M, et al. Phase I clinical study of AZD2171, an oral vascular endothelial growth factor signaling inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(21):3045-3054. (Pubitemid 47218051)
4. Bradley DP, Tessier JJ, Lacey T, et al. Examining the acute effects of cediranib (RECENTIN, AZD2171) treatment in tumor models: a dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI study using gadopentate. Magn Reson Imaging 2009;27(3):377-384.
5. Jackson A, O'Connor JP, Parker GJ, Jayson GC. Imaging tumor vascular heterogeneity and angiogenesis using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13(12):3449-3459. (Pubitemid 46955104)
6. Ng CS, Raunig DL, Jackson EF, et al. Reproducibility of perfusion parameters in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of lung and liver tumors: effect on estimates of patient sample size in clinical trials and on individual patient responses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(2):W134-W140.
7. Ng QS, Goh V, Fichte H, et al. Lung cancer perfusion at multi-detector row CT: reproducibility of whole tumor quantitative measurements. Radiology 2006;239(2):547-553.
8. Ng CS, Chandler AG, Wei W, et al. Reproducibility of perfusion parameters obtained from perfusion CT in lung tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197(1):113-121.
9. Naish JH, McGrath DM, Bains LJ, et al. Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic contrast-enhanced CT biomarkers in bladder cancer. Magn Reson Med 2011;66(1):219-226.
10. Melbourne A, Atkinson D, White MJ, Hawkes DJ, Collins D, Leach MO. Using registration to quantify the consistency of whole liver position during patient breath-hold in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI [abstr]. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Meeting of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Berkeley, Calif: International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2007; 3709.
11. Orton MR, Miyazaki K, Koh DM, et al. Optimizing functional parameter accuracy for breath-hold DCE-MRI of liver tumours. Phys Med Biol 2009;54(7):2197-2215.
12. Fram EK, Herfkens RJ, Johnson GA, et al. Rapid calculation of T1 using variable flip angle gradient refocused imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1987;5(3):201-208. (Pubitemid 17133355)
13. Köstler H, Ritter C, Lipp M, Beer M, Hahn D, Sandstede J. Prebolus quantitative MR heart perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2004;52(2):296-299. (Pubitemid 39025273)
14. Risse F, Semmler W, Kauczor HU, Fink C. Dual-bolus approach to quantitative measurement of pulmonary perfusion by contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24(6):1284-1290. (Pubitemid 44871872)
15. d'Arcy JA, Collins DJ, Padhani AR, Walker-Samuel S, Suckling J, Leach MO. Informatics in Radiology (infoRAD): Magnetic Resonance Imaging Workbench: analysis and visualization of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging data. RadioGraphics 2006;26(2):621-632. (Pubitemid 43515329)
16. Parker GJ, Roberts C, Macdonald A, et al. Experimentally-derived functional form for a population-averaged high-temporal-resolution arterial input function for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Med 2006;56(5):993-1000. (Pubitemid 44691341)
17. Donaldson SB, Buckley DL, O'Connor JP, et al. Enhancing fraction measured using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI predicts disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Cancer 2010;102(1):23-26.
18. St Lawrence KS, Lee TY. An adiabatic approximation to the tissue homogeneity model for water exchange in the brain. I. Theoretical derivation. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1998;18(12):1365-1377. (Pubitemid 28559684)
19. Henderson E, Rutt BK, Lee TY. Temporal sampling requirements for the tracer kinetics modeling of breast disease. Magn Reson Imaging 1998;16(9):1057-1073. (Pubitemid 29196842)
20. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1(8476):307-310. (Pubitemid 16134762)
21. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8(2):135-160. (Pubitemid 29425900)
22. Burton P, Gurrin L, Sly P. Extending the simple linear regression model to account for correlated responses: an introduction to generalized estimating equations and multi-level mixed modelling. Stat Med 1998;17(11):1261-1291. (Pubitemid 28274209)
23. He X, Oyadiji SO. Application of coefficient of variation in reliability-based mechanical design and manufacture. J Mater Process Technol 2001;119(1):374-378. (Pubitemid 34120151)
24. Cheng HL. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in oncology drug development. Curr Clin Pharmacol 2007;2(2):111-122.
25. Galbraith SM, Lodge MA, Taylor NJ, et al. Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in human muscle and tumours: comparison of quantitative and semi-quantitative analysis. NMR Biomed 2002;15(2):132-142. (Pubitemid 34213403)
26. Padhani AR, Hayes C, Landau S, Leach MO. Reproducibility of quantitative dynamic MRI of normal human tissues. NMR Biomed 2002;15(2):143-153. (Pubitemid 34213404)
27. Bisdas S, Surlan-Popovic K, Didanovic V, Vogl TJ. Functional CT of squamous cell carcinoma in the head and neck: repeatability of tumor and muscle quantitative measurements, inter- and intra-observer agreement. Eur Radiol 2008;18(10):2241-2250.
28. Fiorella D, Heiserman J, Prenger E, Partovi S. Assessment of the reproducibility of postprocessing dynamic CT perfusion data. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25(1):97-107. (Pubitemid 38129487)
29. Roberts C, Buckley DL, Parker GJ. Comparison of errors associated with single- and multi-bolus injection protocols in low-temporal-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced tracer kinetic analysis. Magn Reson Med 2006;56(3):611-619. (Pubitemid 44338880)
30. Leach MO, Brindle KM, Evelhoch JL, et al. The assessment of antiangiogenic and antivascular therapies in early-stage clinical trials using magnetic resonance imaging: issues and recommendations. Br J Cancer 2005;92(9):1599-1610. (Pubitemid 40756468)
31. Miles KA. Perfusion CT for the assessment of tumour vascularity: which protocol? Br J Radiol 2003;76(spec no 1):S36-S42. (Pubitemid 39530314)
32. Sourbron S. Technical aspects of MR perfusion. Eur J Radiol 2010;76(3):304-313.
33. Buonaccorsi GA, O'Connor JP, Caunce A, et al. Tracer kinetic model-driven registration for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI time-series data. Magn Reson Med 2007;58(5):1010-1019. (Pubitemid 350074369)
34. Rueckert D, Sonoda LI, Hayes C, Hill DL, Leach MO, Hawkes DJ. Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1999;18(8):712-721. (Pubitemid 32262025)
35. Meng R, Chang SD, Jones EC, Goldenberg SL, Kozlowski P. Comparison between population average and experimentally measured arterial input function in predicting biopsy results in prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 2010;17(4):520-525.
36. Wedge SR, Kendrew J, Hennequin LF, et al. AZD2171: a highly potent, orally bioavailable, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor for the treatment of cancer. Cancer Res 2005;65(10):4389-4400. (Pubitemid 40775678)
37. Batchelor TT, Duda DG, di Tomaso E, et al. Phase II study of cediranib, an oral panvascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(17):2817-2823.
38. Sorensen AG, Batchelor TT, Zhang WT, et al. A "vascular normalization index" as potential mechanistic biomarker to predict survival after a single dose of cediranib in recurrent glioblastoma patients. Cancer Res 2009;69(13):5296-5300.