Imaging intratumor heterogeneity: Role in therapy response, resistance, and clinical outcome

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 249-257

  O'Connor, James P B ^a,b   Rose, Chris J ^a   Waterton, John C ^a,c   Carano, Richard A D ^d   Parker, Geoff J M ^a   Jackson, Alan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b CHRISTIE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^d GENENTECH INC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

BRAIN BLOOD VOLUME; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL DEATH; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; DYNAMIC SUSCEPTIBILITY CONTRAST MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FRACTAL ANALYSIS; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; HISTOGRAM; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTRATUMOR HETEROGENEITY; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PHENOTYPE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR BLOOD FLOW; VOXEL BASED MORPHOMETRY; ANIMAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; GENETICS; NEOPLASM; PATHOLOGY;

ANIMALS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84920964255     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: 15573265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0990     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. Swanton C. Intra tumor heterogeneity: evolution through space and time. Cancer Res 2012;72:4875-82.
2. Heppner GH. Tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Res 1984;44:2259-65.
3. Junttila MR, de Sauvage FJ. Influence of tumour micro-environment heterogeneity on therapeutic response. Nature 2013;501:346-54.
4. Schroeder T, Yuan H, Viglianti BL, Peltz C, Asopa S, Vujaskovic Z, et al. Spatial heterogeneity and oxygen dependence of glucose consumption in R3230Ac and fibrosarcomas of the Fischer 344 rat. Cancer Res 2005;65: 5163-71.
5. Cardenas-Navia LI, Mace D, Richardson RA, Wilson DF, Shan S, Dewhirst MW. The pervasive presence of fluctuating oxygenation in tumors. Cancer Res 2008;68:5812-9.
6. Serganova I, Doubrovin M, Vider J, Ponomarev V, Soghomonyan S, Beresten T, et al. Molecular imaging of temporal dynamics and spatial heterogeneity of hypoxia-inducible factor-1 signal transduction activity in tumors in living mice. Cancer Res 2004;64:6101-8.
7. Eskey CJ, Koretsky AP, Domach MM, Jain RK. 2H-nuclear magnetic resonance imaging of tumor blood flow: spatial and temporal heterogeneity in a tissue-isolated mammary adenocarcinoma. Cancer Res 1992;52:6010-9.
8. Hamberg LM, Kristjansen PE, Hunter GJ, Wolf GL, Jain RK. Spatial heterogeneity in tumor perfusionmeasuredwith functional computed tomography at 0.05 micro liter resolution. Cancer Res 1994;54:6032-6.
9. Degani H, Gusis V, Weinstein D, Fields S, Strano S. Mapping pathophysiological features of breast tumors by MRI at high spatial resolution. Nat Med 1997;3:780-2.
10. Choi YP, Shim HS, Gao MQ, Kang S, Cho NH. Molecular portraits of intra tumoral heterogeneity in human ovarian cancer. Cancer Lett 2011; 307:62-71.
11. Gatenby RA, Silva AS, Gillies RJ, Frieden BR. Adaptive therapy. Cancer Res 2009;69:4894-903.
12. Meacham CE, Morrison SJ. Tum our heterogeneity and cancer cell plasticity. Nature 2013;501:328-37.
13. Brurberg KG, Gaustad JV, Mollatt CS, Rofstad EK. Temporal heterogeneity in blood supply in human tumor xenografts. Neo plasia 2008;10: 727-35.
14. Shipitsin M, Campbell LL, Argani P, Weremowicz S, Bloushtain-Qimron N, Yao J, et al. Molecular definition of breast tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Cell 2007;11:259-73.
15. Gatenby RA, Grove O, Gillies RJ. Quantitative imaging in cancer evolution and ecology. Radiology 2013;269:8-15.
16. Simpson-Herren L, Noker PE, Wagoner SD. Variability of tumor response to chemotherapy. II. Contribution of tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1988;22:131-6.
17. Just N. Improving tumour heterogeneity MRI assessment with histograms. Br J Cancer 2014;111:2205-13.
18. O'Connor JP, Jackson A, Asselin MC, Buckley DL, Parker GJ, Jayson GC. Quantitative imaging biomarkers in the clinical development of targeted therapeutics: current and future perspectives. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:766-76.
19. Gonzalez-Garcia I, Sole RV, Costa J. Meta population dynamics and spatial heterogeneity in cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002;99:13085-9.
20. Xu DM, van Klaveren RJ, de Bock GH, Leusveld A, Zhao Y, Wang Y, et al. Limited value of shape, margin and CT density in the discrimination between benign and malignant screen detected solid pulmonary nodules of the NELSON trial. Eur J Radiol 2008;68:347-52.
21. Burrell HC, Pinder SE, Wilson AR, Evans AJ, Yeoman LJ, Elston CW, et al. The positive predictive value of mammographic signs: A review of 425 non palpable breast lesions. Clin Radiol 1996;51:277-81.
22. Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC. BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 1999;211:845-50.
23. Huang YE, Chen CF, Huang YJ, Konda SD, Appelbaum DE, Pu Y. Inter observer variability among measurements of the maximum and mean standardized uptake values on (18)F-FDG PET/CT and measurements of tumor size on diagnostic CT in patients with pulmonary tumors. Acta Radiol 2010;51:782-8.
24. Jackson T, Chung MK, Mercier G, Ozonoff A, Subramaniam RM. FDG PET/CT inter observer agreement in head and neck cancer: FDG and CT measurements of the primary tumor site. Nucl Med Commun 2012;33:305-12.
25. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008;49:480-508.
26. Pirotte B, Goldman S, Massager N, David P, Wikler D, Vandesteene A, et al. Comparison of 18F-FDG and 11C-methionine for PET-guided stereotactic brain biopsy of gliomas. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1293-8.
27. Knopp EA, Cha S, Johnson G, Mazumdar A, Golfinos JG, Zagzag D, et al. Glial neoplasms: dynamic contrast-enhanced T2-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 1999;211:791-8.
28. O'Connor JP, Jackson A, Parker GJ, Roberts C, Jayson GC. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical trials of anti vascular therapies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2012;9:167-77.
29. 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;13:3449-59.
30. Pope WB, Kim HJ, Huo J, Alger J, Brown MS, Gjertson D, et al. Recurrent glioblastoma multi forme: ADC histogram analysis predicts response to bevacizumab treatment. Radiology 2009;252:182-9.
31. Chen W, Giger ML, LiH, Bick U, Newstead GM. Volumetric texture analysis of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:562-71.
32. Cebulla J, Kim E, Rhie K, Zhang J, Pathak AP. Multi scale and multimodality visualization of angiogenesis in a human breast cancer model. Angiogenesis 2014;17:695-709.
33. Gerlinger M, Rowan AJ, Horswell S, Larkin J, Endesfelder D, Gronroos E, et al. Intra tumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multi region sequencing. N Engl J Med 2012;366:883-92.
34. Issa B, Buckley DL, Turnbull LW. Heterogeneity analysis of Gd-DTPA uptake: Improvement in breast lesion differentiation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999;23:615-21.
35. Alic L, Niessen WJ, Veenland JF. Quantification of heterogeneity as a biomarker in tumor imaging: A systematic review. PLoS One 2014;9: e110300.
36. Yang X, Knopp MV. Quantifying tumor vascular heterogeneity with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: A review. J Biomed Biotechnol 2011;2011:732848.
37. Law M, Young R, Babb J, Pollack E, Johnson G. Histogram analysis versus region of interest analysis of dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging data in the grading of cerebral gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuro radiol 2007;28:761-6.
38. Emblem KE, Nedregaard B, Nome T, Due-Tonnessen P, Hald JK, Scheie D, et al. Glioma grading by using histogram analysis of blood volume heterogeneity from MR-derived cerebral blood volume maps. Radiology 2008;247:808-17.
39. Kidd EA, Grigsby PW. Intra tumoral metabolic heterogeneity of cervical cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:5236-41.
40. Tofts PS, Benton CE, Weil RS, Tozer DJ, Altmann DR, Jager HR, et al. Quantitative analysis of whole-tumor Gd enhancement histograms predicts malignant transformation in low-grade gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:208-14.
41. Robinson SP, McIntyre DJ, Checkley D, Tessier JJ, Howe FA, Griffiths JR, et al. Tumour dose response to the anti vascular agent ZD6126 assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1592-7.
42. Pope WB, Qiao XJ, Kim HJ, Lai A, Nghiemphu P, Xue X, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient histogram analysis stratifies progression-free and overall survival in patients with recurrent GBM treated with bevacizumab: A multi-center study. J Neurooncol 2012;108:491-8.
43. O'Connor E, Fieller N, Holmes A, Waterton JC, Ainscow E. Functional principal component analyses of biomedical images as outcome measures. J R Stat Soc (Ser C Appl Stat) 2010;59:57-76.
44. Rose CJ, O'Connor JPB, Cootes TF, Taylor CJ, Jayson GC, Parker GJM, et al. Indexed distribution analysis for improved significance testing of spatially heterogeneous parameter maps: Application to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI biomarkers. Magn Reson Med 2014;71:1299- 311.
45. Tixier F, Hatt M, Le Rest CC, Le Pogam A, Corcos L, Visvikis D. Reproducibility of tumor uptake heterogeneity characterization through textural feature analysis in 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2012;53:693-700.
46. Willaime JM, Turkheimer FE, Kenny LM, Aboagye EO. Quantification of intra-tumour cell proliferation heterogeneity using imaging descriptors of 18F fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography. Phys Med Biol 2013;58:187-203.
47. Sanghera B, BanerjeeD, Khan A, Simcock I, Stirling JJ, Glynne-Jones R, et al. Reproducibility of2Dand 3Dfractal analysis techniques for the assessment of spatial heterogeneity of regional blood flow in rectal cancer. Radiology 2012;263:865-73.
48. O'Connor JP, Carano RA, Clamp AR, Ross J, Ho CC, Jackson A, et al. Quantifying anti vascular effects of monoclonal antibodies to vascular endothelial growth factor: Insights from imaging. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15:6674-82.
49. Haralick RM, Shanmuga K, Dinstein I. Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Systems Man Cybernetics 1973;6:610-21.
50. Peitgen H-O, Jurgens H, Saupe D. Chaos and fractals. Berlin: Springer; 2004.
51. Rose CJ, Mills SJ, O'Connor JP, Buonaccorsi GA, Roberts C, Watson Y, et al. Quantifying spatial heterogeneity in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameter maps. Magn Reson Med 2009;62:488-99.
52. Oliver A, Freixenet J, Marti J, Perez E, Pont J, Denton ER, et al. A review of automatic mass detection and segmentation in mammographic images. Med Image Anal 2010;14:87-110.
53. Miller P, Astley S. Classification of breast tissue by texture analysis. Image Vis Comput 1992;10:277-82.
54. Li H, Giger ML, Olopade OI, Lan L. Fractal analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns in breast cancer risk assessment. Acad Radiol 2007; 14:513-21.
55. Ng F, Ganeshan B, Kozarski R, Miles KA, Goh V. Assessment of primary colorectal cancer heterogeneity by using whole-tumor texture analysis: contrast-enhanced CT texture as a biomarker of 5-year survival. Radiology 2013;266:177-84.
56. Goh V, Ganeshan B, Nathan P, Juttla JK, Vinayan A, Miles KA. Assessment of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic renal cell cancer: CT texture as a predictive biomarker. Radiology 2011;261:165-71.
57. Balagurunathan Y, Gu Y, Wang H, Kumar V, Grove O, Hawkins S, et al. Reproducibility and prognosis of quantitative features extracted from CT images. Transl Oncol 2014;7:72-87.
58. O'Connor JP, Rose CJ, Jackson A, Watson Y, Cheung S, Maders F, et al. DCEMRI biomarkers of tumour heterogeneity predict CRC liver metastasis shrinkage following bevacizumab and FOLFOX-6. Br J Cancer 2011;105: 139-45.
59. Alic L, van Vliet M, van Dijke CF, Eggermont AM, Veenland JF, Niessen WJ. Heterogeneity in DCE-MRI parametric maps: A biomarker for treatment response? Phys Med Biol 2011;56:1601-16.
60. Aerts HJ, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RT, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Cavalho S, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radio mics approach. Nat Commun 2014;5:4006.
61. Gaustad JV, Benjaminsen IC, Graff BA, Brurberg KG, Ruud EB, Rofstad EK. Intra tumor heterogeneity in blood perfusion in orthotopic human melanoma xenografts assessed by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21:792-800.
62. Checkley D, Tessier JJ, Kendrew J, Waterton JC, Wedge SR. Use of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to evaluate acute treatment with ZD6474, a VEGF signalling inhibitor, inPC-3 prostate tumours. Br JCancer 2003;89:1889-95.
63. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA, Cloughesy TF, Sorensen AG, Galanis E, et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1963-72.
64. Dingemans AM, de Langen AJ, van den Boogaart V, Marcus JT, Backes WH, Scholtens HT, et al. First-line erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase II study including molecular imaging. Ann Oncol 2011;22:559-66.
65. Padhani AR, Miles KA. Multi parametric imaging of tumor response to therapy. Radiology 2010;256:348-64.
66. Vannier MW, Butterfield RL, Jordan D, Murphy WA, Levitt RG, Gado M. Multispectral analysis of magnetic resonance images. Radiology 1985; 154:221-4.
67. Zhang W, Kreisl TN, Solomon J, Reynolds RC, Glen DR, Cox RW, et al. Acute effects of bevacizumab on glioblastoma vascularity assessed with DCE-MRI and relation to patient survival. Proceedings ISMRM 2009;17:282.
68. Ellingson BM, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Nghiemphu PL, Mischel PS, Pope WB. Quantitative volumetric analysis of conventional MRI response in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. Neuro Oncol 2011;13:401-9.
69. Kreisl TN, Zhang W, Odia Y, Shih JH, Butman JA, Hammoud D, et al. A phase II trial of single-agent bevacizumab in patients with recurrent anaplastic glioma. Neuro Oncol 2011;13:1143-50.
70. Donaldson SB, Buckley DL, O'Connor JP, Davidson SE, Carrington BM, Jones AP, et al. Enhancing fraction measured using dynamic contra stenhanced MRI predicts disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Cancer 2010;102:23-6.
71. Mannelli L, Patterson AJ, Zahra M, Priest AN, Graves MJ, Lomas DJ, et al. Evaluation of non enhancing tumor fraction assessed by dynamic contrastenhanced MRI subtraction as a predictor of decrease in tumor volume in response to chemo radiotherapy in advanced cervical cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:524-7.
72. Messiou C, Orton M, Ang JE, Collins DJ, Morgan VA, Mears D, et al. Advanced solid tumors treated with cediranib: comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and CT as markers of vascular activity. Radiology 2012;265:426-36.
73. Prior JO, Montemurro M, Orcurto MV, Michielin O, Luthi F, Benhattar J, et al. Early prediction of response to sunitinib after imatinib failure by 18Ffluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:439-45.
74. Holdsworth CH, Badawi RD, Manola JB, Kijewski MF, Israel DA, Demetri GD, et al. CT and PET: early prognostic indicators of response to imatinib mesylate in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:W324-30.
75. Kayani I, Avril N, Bomanji J, Chowdhury S, Rockall A, Sahdev A, et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT as a biomarker of response to Sunitinib in metastatic clear cell renal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17:6021-8.
76. Carano RA, Ross AL, Ross J, Williams SP, Koeppen H, Schwall RH, et al. Quantification of tumor tissue populations by multispectral analysis. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:542-51.
77. Henning EC, Azuma C, Sotak CH, Helmer KG. Multispectral quantification of tissue types in a RIF-1 tumor model with histological validation. Part I. Magn Reson Med 2007;57:501-12.
78. Henning EC, Azuma C, Sotak CH, Helmer KG. Multispectral tissue characterization in a RIF-1 tumor model: monitoring the ADC and T2 responses to single-dose radiotherapy. Part II. Magn Reson Med 2007;57:513-9.
79. Berry LR, Barck KH, Go MA, Ross J, Wu X, Williams SP, et al. Quantification of viable tumor micro vascular characteristics by multispectral analysis. Magn Reson Med 2008;60:64-72.
80. Chen L, Choyke PL, Chan TH, Chi CY, Wang G, Wang Y. Tissue-specific compartmental analysis for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of complex tumors. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2011;30:2044-58.
81. Galban CJ, Chenevert TL, Meyer CR, Tsien C, Lawrence TS, Hamstra DA, et al. Prospective analysis of parametric response map-derived MRI biomarkers: Identification of early and distinct glioma response patterns not predicted by standard radiographic assessment. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17: 4751-60.
82. Costouros NG, Lorang D, Zhang Y, Miller MS, Diehn FE, Hewitt SM, et al. Microarray gene expression analysis of murine tumor heterogeneity defined by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Mol Imaging 2002;1:301-8.
83. von Forstner C, Egberts JH, Ammerpohl O, Niedzielska D, Buchert R, Mikecz P, et al. Gene expression patterns and tumor uptake of 18F-FDG, 18F-FLT, and 18F-FEC in PET/MRI of an orthotopic mouse xenotransplantation model of pancreatic cancer. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1362-70.
84. Yamamoto S, Maki DD, Korn RL, Kuo MD. Radio genomic analysis of breast cancer using MRI: A preliminary study to define the landscape. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:654-63.
85. Jenkinson MD, Smith TS, Brodbelt AR, Joyce KA, Warnke PC, Walker C. Apparent diffusion coefficients in oligodendroglial tumors characterized by genotype. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;26:1405-12.
86. Waterton JC, Pylkkanen L. Qualification of imaging biomarkers for oncology drug development. Eur J Cancer 2012;48:409-15.