Early response to anti-tumoral treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma - Can quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound predict outcome?

Ultraschall in der Medizin

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 38-46

  Knieling, F ^a   Waldner, M J ^a   Goertz, R S ^a   Zopf, S ^a   Wildner, D ^a   Neurath, M F ^a   Bernatik, T ^b   Strobel, D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ERLANGEN   (Germany)

^b Kreisklinik Ebersberg   (Germany)

Author keywords

abdomen; angiogenesis; microbubbles; tumor; ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITOR; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CARBANILAMIDE DERIVATIVE; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DRUG DERIVATIVE; NICOTINAMIDE; SORAFENIB;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BLOOD FLOW; CANCER STAGING; CHEMOEMBOLIZATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECT; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; LIVER TUMOR; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VASCULARIZATION;

ADULT; ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITORS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CARCINOMA, HEPATOCELLULAR; CHEMOEMBOLIZATION, THERAPEUTIC; CONTRAST MEDIA; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; NIACINAMIDE; PHENYLUREA COMPOUNDS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; REGIONAL BLOOD FLOW; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84873569071     PISSN: 01724614     EISSN: 14388782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1330387     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Hanahan D., Weinberg R. A. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell: 2000; 100 57 70 (Pubitemid 30046295)
2. Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med: 1971; 285 1182 1186 10.1056/NEJM197111182852108
3. Carmeliet P., Jain R. K. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature: 2000; 407 249 257 10.1038/35025220
4. Waldner M. J., Wirtz S., Jefremow A. et al. VEGF receptor signaling links inflammation and tumorigenesis in colitis-associated cancer. J Exp Med: 2010; 207 2855 2868 10.1084/jem.20100438
5. Bruix J., Sherman M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: An update. Hepatology: 2011; 53 1020 1022 10.1002/hep.24199
6. Llovet J. M., Ricci S., Mazzaferro V. et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med: 2008; 359 378 390 10.1056/NEJMoa0708857
7. World Health Organization WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Geneva World Health Organization: 1979
8. Miller A. B., Hoogstraten B., Staquet M. et al. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer: 1981; 47 207 214 (Pubitemid 11167383)
9. Eisenhauer E. A., Therasse P., Bogaerts J. et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). European Journal of Cancer: 2009; 45 228 247 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
10. Kudo M., Kubo S., Takayasu K. et al. Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) proposed by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (2009 Revised Version). Hepatol Res: 2010; 40 686 692 10.1111/j.1872-034X.2010. 00674.x
11. Llovet J. M., Di Bisceglie A. M., Bruix J. et al. Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst: 2008; 100 698 711 10.1093/jnci/djn134
12. Hurwitz H., Fehrenbacher L., Novotny W. et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med: 2004; 350 2335 2342 10.1056/NEJMoa032691 (Pubitemid 38702844)
13. Shepherd F. A., Rodrigues Pereira J., Ciuleanu T. et al. Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med: 2005; 353 123 132 10.1056/NEJMoa050753 (Pubitemid 41058344)
14. Hudes G., Carducci M., Tomczak P. et al. Temsirolimus, interferon alfa, or both for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med: 2007; 356 2271 2281 10.1056/NEJMoa066838 (Pubitemid 46849157)
15. Lassau N., Koscielny S., Albiges L. et al. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sunitinib: early evaluation of treatment response using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Clin Cancer Res: 2010; 16 1216 1225 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-2175
16. Lassau N., Chami L., Chebil M. et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCE-US) and anti-angiogenic treatments. Discov Med: 2011; 11 18 24
17. Lassau N., Koscielny S., Chami L. et al. Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: early evaluation of response to bevacizumab therapy at dynamic contrast-enhanced US with quantification - preliminary results. Radiology: 2011; 258 291 300 10.1148/radiol.10091870
18. Lassau N., Lamuraglia M., Chami L. et al. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors treated with imatinib: monitoring response with contrast-enhanced sonography. Am J Roentgenol Am J Roentgenol: 2006; 187 1267 1273 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.05.1192 (Pubitemid 44630831)
19. Yoshida K., Hirokawa T., Moriyasu F. et al. Arterial-phase contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluating anti-angiogenesis treatment: a pilot study. World J Gastroenterol: 2011; 17 1045 1050 10.3748/wjg.v17.i8.1045
20. Bruix J., Sherman M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology: 2005; 42 1208 1236 10.1002/hep.20933 (Pubitemid 43112690)
21. Claudon M., Cosgrove D., Albrecht T. et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) - update 2008. Ultraschall in Med: 2008; 29 28 44 10.1055/s-2007-963785 (Pubitemid 351294171)
22. Soder R. B., Baldisserotto M., Duval da Silva V. Computer-assisted ultrasound analysis of liver echogenicity in obese and normal-weight children. Am J Roentgenol: 2009; 192 W201 W205 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.08.2061
23. Ignee A., Jedrejczyk M., Schuessler G. et al. Quantitative contrast enhanced ultrasound of the liver for time intensity curves-Reliability and potential sources of errors. Eur J Radiol: 2010; 73 153 158 10.1016/j.ejrad. 2008.10.016
24. Heidenreich P. A., Wiencek J. G., Zaroff J. G. et al. In vitro calculation of flow by use of contrast ultrasonography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr: 1993; 6 51 61
25. Schwarz K. Q., Bezante G. P., Chen X. et al. Volumetric arterial flow quantification using echo contrast. An in vitro comparison of three ultrasonic intensity methods: radio frequency, video and Doppler. Ultrasound Med Biol: 1993; 19 447 460 (Pubitemid 23241721)
26. Correas J. M., Burns P. N., Lai X. et al. Infusion versus bolus of an ultrasound contrast agent: in vivo dose-response measurements of BR1. Invest Radiol: 2000; 35 72 79 (Pubitemid 30033609)
27. Claassen L., Seidel G., Algermissen C. Quantification of flow rates using harmonic grey-scale imaging and an ultrasound contrast agent: an in vitro and in vivo study. Ultrasound Med Biol: 2001; 27 83 88 (Pubitemid 32280235)
28. Jaffe C. C. Measures of response: RECIST, WHO, and new alternatives. J Clin Oncol: 2006; 24 3245 3251 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.5599 (Pubitemid 46622065)
29. Choi H., Charnsangavej C., de Castro Faria S. et al. CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib mesylate treatment: a quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. Am J Roentgenol: 2004; 183 1619 1628 (Pubitemid 44210530)
30. Forner A., Ayuso C., Varela M. et al. Evaluation of tumor response after locoregional therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: are response evaluation criteria in solid tumors reliable? Cancer: 2009; 115 616 623 10.1002/cncr.24050
31. Lee C. H., Braga L., de Campos R. O. et al. Hepatic tumor response evaluation by MRI. NMR Biomed: 2011; 24 721 733 10.1002/nbm.1637
32. Hittinger M., Staehler M., Schramm N. et al. Course of size and density of metastatic renal cell carcinoma lesions in the early follow-up of molecular targeted therapy. Urol Oncol: 2011; 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.10.011
33. Abou-Alfa G. K., Schwartz L., Ricci S. et al. Phase II study of sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol: 2006; 24 4293 4300 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.3441 (Pubitemid 46630787)
34. Horger M., Lauer U. M., Schraml C. et al. Early MRI response monitoring of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma under treatment with the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib. BMC Cancer: 2009; 9 208 10.1186/1471-2407-9-208
35. Carmeliet P., Jain R. K. Molecular mechanisms and clinical applications of angiogenesis. Nature: 2011; 473 298 307 10.1038/nature10144
36. de Langen A. J., van den Boogaart V., Lubberink M. et al. Monitoring response to antiangiogenic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer using imaging markers derived from PET and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Nucl Med: 2011; 52 48 55 10.2967/jnumed.110.078261
37. Siegel A. B., Cohen E. I., Ocean A. et al. Phase II trial evaluating the clinical and biologic effects of bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol: 2008; 26 2992 2998 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.9947
38. Sunaga N., Oriuchi N., Kaira K. et al. Usefulness of FDG-PET for early prediction of the response to gefitinib in non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer: 2008; 59 203 210 10.1016/j.lungcan.2007.08.012 (Pubitemid 351173409)
39. Hamstra D. A., Rehemtulla A., Ross B. D. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: a biomarker for treatment response in oncology. J Clin Oncol: 2007; 25 4104 4109 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.9610 (Pubitemid 47495868)
40. O'Connor J. P., Jackson A., Parker G. J. et al. DCE-MRI biomarkers in the clinical evaluation of antiangiogenic and vascular disrupting agents. Br J Cancer: 2007; 96 189 195 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603515 (Pubitemid 46160619)
41. Verheul H. M., Pinedo H. M. Possible molecular mechanisms involved in the toxicity of angiogenesis inhibition. Nat Rev Cancer: 2007; 7 475 485 10.1038/nrc2152 (Pubitemid 46809172)
42. Jubb A. M., Harris A. L. Biomarkers to predict the clinical efficacy of bevacizumab in cancer. Lancet Oncol: 2010; 11 1172 1183 10.1016/S1470-2045(10) 70232-1
43. Veronese M. L., Mosenkis A., Flaherty K. T. et al. Mechanisms of hypertension associated with BAY 43-9006. J Clin Oncol: 2006; 24 1363 1369 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.0503 (Pubitemid 46621999)
44. Robinson E. S., Matulonis U. A., Ivy P. et al. Rapid development of hypertension and proteinuria with cediranib, an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol: 2010; 5 477 483 10.2215/CJN.08111109
45. Bhargava P. VEGF kinase inhibitors: how do they cause hypertension? Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol: 2009; 297 R1 R5 10.1152/ajpregu.90502.2008
46. Li B., Ogasawara A. K., Yang R. et al. KDR (VEGF receptor 2) is the major mediator for the hypotensive effect of VEGF. Hypertension: 2002; 39 1095 1100 (Pubitemid 34620130)
47. Steeghs N., Gelderblom H., Roodt J. O. et al. Hypertension and rarefaction during treatment with telatinib, a small molecule angiogenesis inhibitor. Clin Cancer Res: 2008; 14 3470 3476 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-5050
48. Strobel D., Seitz K., Blank W. et al. Tumor-specific vascularization pattern of liver metastasis, hepatocellular carcinoma, hemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the differential diagnosis of 1,349 liver lesions in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultraschall in Med: 2009; 30 376 382 10.1055/s-0028-1109672
49. ®-enhanced ultrasound compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced MRI: a meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol: 2011; 137 1595 1605 10.1007/s00432-011-1035-8
50. Moriyasu F., Itoh K. Efficacy of perflubutane microbubble-enhanced ultrasound in the characterization and detection of focal liver lesions: phase 3 multicenter clinical trial. Am J Roentgenol: 2009; 193 86 95 10.2214/Am J Roentgenol.08.1618
51. Tranquart F., Correas J. M., Ladam Marcus V. et al. Real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of focal liver lesions: diagnostic efficacy and economical issues from a French multicentric study. J Radiol: 2009; 90 109 122
52. Trillaud H., Bruel J. M., Valette P. J. et al. Characterization of focal liver lesions with SonoVue-enhanced sonography: international multicenter-study in comparison to CT and MRI. World J Gastroenterol: 2009; 15 3748 3756
53. Bernatik T., Becker D., Neureiter D. et al. Detection of liver metastases - comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound using first versus second generation contrast agents. Ultraschall in Med: 2003; 24 175 179 10.1055/s-2003-40060 (Pubitemid 36841325)
54. Strobel D., Kleinecke C., Hansler J. et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography for the characterisation of hepatocellular carcinomas - correlation with histological differentiation. Ultraschall in Med: 2005; 26 270 276 10.1055/s-2005-858518 (Pubitemid 41232708)
55. Strobel D., Seitz K., Blank W. et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions - diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall in Med: 2008; 29 499 505 10.1055/s-2008-1027806
56. Romanini L., Passamonti M., Aiani L. et al. Economic assessment of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of focal liver lesions: a multicentre Italian experience. Eur Radiol: 2007; 17 F99 F106 (Pubitemid 351337914)
57. Giesel F. L., Delorme S., Sibbel R. et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of incidental liver lesions - an economical evaluation in comparison with multi-phase computed tomography. Ultraschall in Med: 2009; 30 259 268 10.1055/s-0028-1109449
58. Schuler A., Reuss J., Delorme S. et al. Costs of clinical ultrasound examinations - an economical cost calculation and analysis. Ultraschall in Med: 2010; 31 379 386 10.1055/s-0029-1245283
59. Lassau N., Chami L., Benatsou B. et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCE-US) with quantification of tumor perfusion: a new diagnostic tool to evaluate the early effects of antiangiogenic treatment. Eur Radiol: 2007; 17 F89 F98 (Pubitemid 351337913)
60. Lassau N., Lamuraglia M., Koscielny S. et al. Prognostic value of angiogenesis evaluated with high-frequency and colour Doppler sonography for preoperative assessment of primary cutaneous melanomas: correlation with recurrence after a 5 year follow-up period. Cancer imaging: the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society: 2006; 6 24 29 10.1102/1470-7330.2006.0009
61. Lamuraglia M., Escudier B., Chami L. et al. To predict progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic renal cancer treated with sorafenib: pilot study using dynamic contrast-enhanced Doppler ultrasound. European Journal of Cancer: 2006; 42 2472 2479 10.1016/j.ejca.2006.04.023 (Pubitemid 44442955)
62. Egger C., Goertz R. S., Strobel D. et al. Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (DCE-US) for Easy and Rapid Evaluation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Compared to Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography (DCE-CT) - A Pilot Study. Ultraschall in Med: 2012; 33 587 592
63. Dietrich C. F., Averkiou M. A., Correas J. M. et al. An EFSUMB introduction into Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (DCE-US) for quantification of tumour perfusion. Ultraschall in Med: 2012; 33 344 351 10.1055/s-0032-1313026