Large-scale radiomic profiling of recurrent glioblastoma identifies an imaging predictor for stratifying anti-angiogenic treatment response

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 22, Issue 23, 2016, Pages 5765-5771

  Kickingereder, Philipp ^a   Götz, Michael ^b   Muschelli, John ^c   Wick, Antje ^a   Neuberger, Ulf ^a   Shinohara, Russell T ^d   Sill, Martin ^b   Nowosielski, Martha ^e   Schlemmer, Heinz Peter ^b   Radbruch, Alexander ^a,b   Wick, Wolfgang ^a,b   Bendszus, Martin ^a   Maier Hein, Klaus H ^b   Bonekamp, David ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b GERMAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER DKFZ   (Germany)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^e INNSBRUCK MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEVACIZUMAB; ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITOR;

ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURVIVAL; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG RESPONSE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; ADULT; AGED; BRAIN TUMOR; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR RECURRENCE; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITORS; BEVACIZUMAB; BRAIN NEOPLASMS; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85006320610     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: 15573265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0702     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK, Burger PC, Jouvet A, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol 2007;114:97-109.
2. Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Liao P, Rouse C, Chen Y, Dowling J, et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the united states in 2007-2011. Neuro-Oncol 2014;16:iv1-iv63.
3. Friedman HS, Prados MD, Wen PY, Mikkelsen T, Schiff D, Abrey LE, et al. Bevacizumab alone and in combination with irinotecan in recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4733-40.
4. Kreisl TN, Kim L, Moore K, Duic P, Royce C, Stroud I, et al. Phase II trial of single-agent bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab plus irinotecan at tumor progression in recurrent glioblastoma. J ClinOncol 2009;27:740-5.
5. Chinot OL, Wick W, Mason W, Henriksson R, Saran F, Nishikawa R, et al. Bevacizumab plus radiotherapy-temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2014;370:709-22.
6. Gilbert MR, Dignam JJ, Armstrong TS, Wefel JS, Blumenthal DT, Vogelbaum MA, et al. A randomized trial of bevacizumab for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 2014;370:699-708.
7. Wick W, Brandes A, Gorlia T, Bendszus M, Sahm F, Taal W, et al. Phase III trial exploring the combination of bevacizumab and lomustine in patients with first recurrence of a glioblastoma: the EORTC 26101 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ScientificMeeting for the Society forNeuro-Oncology; 2015 Nov 19-22; San, Antonio, TX. Houston (TX): SNO; 2015.
8. Lu-Emerson C, Duda DG, Emblem KE, Taylor JW, Gerstner ER, Loeffler JS, et al. Lessons from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor trials in patients with glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:1197-213.
9. Mayer TM. Can we predict bevacizumab responders in patients with glioblastoma? J Clin Oncol 2015;33:2721-2.
10. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, Brat DJ, Verhaak RG, Aldape KD, Yung WK, Salama SR, et al. Comprehensive, integrative genomic analysis of diffuse lower-grade gliomas. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2481-98.
11. Verhaak RG, Hoadley KA, Purdom E, Wang V, Qi Y, Wilkerson MD, et al. Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell 2010;17:98-110.
12. Sandmann T, Bourgon R,Garcia J, Li C,Cloughesy T, ChinotOL, et al. Patients with proneural glioblastoma may derive overall survival benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to first-line radiotherapy and temozolomide: retrospective analysis of the AVAglio Trial. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:2735-44.
13. Nowosielski M, Wiestler B, Goebel G, Hutterer M, Schlemmer HP, Stockhammer G, et al. Progression types after antiangiogenic therapy are related to outcome in recurrent glioblastoma. Neurology 2014;82:1684-92.
14. Kickingereder P, Wiestler B, Burth S, Wick A, Nowosielski M, Heiland S, et al. Relative cerebral blood volume is a potential predictive imaging biomarker of bevacizumab efficacy in recurrent glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 2015;17:1139-47.
15. Kickingereder P, Radbruch A, Burth S, Wick A, Heiland S, Schlemmer HP, et al. MR perfusion-derived hemodynamic parametric response mapping of bevacizumab efficacy in recurrent glioblastoma. Radiology 2016;279: 542-52.
16. Itakura H, Achrol AS, Mitchell LA, Loya JJ, Liu T, Westbroek EM, et al. Magnetic resonance image features identify glioblastoma phenotypic subtypes with distinct molecular pathway activities. Sci Translat Med 2015;7:303ra138.
17. Aerts HJ, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RT, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Carvalho S, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun 2014;5:4006.
18. Lambin P, Rios-Velazquez E, Leijenaar R, Carvalho S, van Stiphout RG, Granton P, et al. Radiomics: extracting more information from medical images using advanced feature analysis. Eur J Cancer 2012;48:441-6.
19. 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.
20. Smith SM. Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 2002;17:143-55.
21. Jenkinson M, Bannister P, Brady M, Smith S. Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. NeuroImage 2002;17:825-41.
22. Jenkinson M, Smith S. A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal 2001;5:143-56.
23. Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, Smith RG, Ho S, Gee JC, et al. Userguided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 2006;31:1116-28. Epub 2006 Mar 20.
24. Bonekamp D, Mouridsen K, Radbruch A, Kurz FT, Eidel O, Wick A, et al. Assessment of tumor oxygenation and its impact on treatment response in bevacizumab-treated recurrent glioblastoma. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2016 Feb 9. [Epub ahead of print].
25. Shinohara RT, Sweeney EM, Goldsmith J, Shiee N,Mateen FJ, Calabresi PA, et al. Statistical normalization techniques formagnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage Clin 2014;6:9-19.
26. Nolden M, Zelzer S, Seitel A, Wald D, Muller M, Franz AM, et al. The medical imaging interaction toolkit: challenges and advances: 10 years of open-source development. Int J Comp Ass Radiol Surg 2013;8:607-20.
27. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2014.
28. Bair E, Tibshirani R. Semi-supervised methods to predict patient survival from gene expression data. PLoS Biol 2004;2:E108.
29. Bair E, Tibshirani R. superpc: supervised principal components; 2012. Available from: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~tibs/superpc.
30. Bair E, Hastie T, Paul D, Tibshirani R. Prediction by supervised principal components. J Am Stat Assoc 2006;101:119-37.
31. Pellagatti A, Benner A, Mills KI, Cazzola M, Giagounidis A, Perry J, et al. Identification of gene expression-based prognostic markers in the hematopoietic stem cells of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. JClin Oncol 2013;31:3557-64.
32. De Cecco L, Bossi P, Locati L, Canevari S, Licitra L. Comprehensive gene expression meta-analysis of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma microarray data defines a robust survival predictor. Ann Oncol 2014;25: 1628-35.
33. Chen X, Wang L, Smith JD, Zhang B. Supervised principal component analysis for gene set enrichment of microarray data with continuous or survival outcomes. Bioinformatics 2008;24:2474-81.
34. Gerds TA, Schumacher M. Efron-type measures of prediction error for survival analysis. Biometrics 2007;63:1283-7.
35. Schumacher M, Binder H, Gerds T. Assessment of survival prediction models based on microarray data. Bioinformatics 2007;23:1768-74.
36. Mogensen UB, Ishwaran H, Gerds TA. Evaluating random forests for survival analysis using prediction error curves. J Stat Soft 2012;50: 1-23.
37. Uno H, Cai T, Tian L, Wei LJ. Evaluating prediction rules for t-year survivors with censored regression models. J Am Stat Assoc 2007; 102:527-37.
38. Sulman EP, Won M, Blumenthal DT, Vogelbaum MA, Colman H, Jenkins RB, et al. Molecular predictors of outcome and response to bevacizumab (BEV) based on analysis of RTOG 0825, a phase III trial comparing chemoradiation (CRT) with and without BEV in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl; abstr LBA2010).
39. Piao Y, Liang J, Holmes L, Henry V, Sulman E, de Groot JF. Acquired resistance to anti-VEGF therapy in glioblastoma is associated with a mesenchymal transition. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:4392-403.
40. Patel AP, Tirosh I, Trombetta JJ, Shalek AK, Gillespie SM, WakimotoH, et al. Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma. Science 2014;344:1396-401.