Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Korean Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (대한자기공명의과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Noninvasive Biomarker for Predicting Treatment Response to Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

  • Chung, Yong Eun (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Jun Yong (Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Jin-Young (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Myeong-Jin (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Mi-suk (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Seong, Jinsil (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2019.05.13
  • Accepted : 2019.08.22
  • Published : 2019.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate noninvasive biomarkers for predicting treatment response in patients with locally advanced HCC who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRTx). Materials and Methods: Thirty patients (55.5 ± 10.2 years old, M:F = 24:6) who underwent CCRTx due to advanced HCC were enrolled. Contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were obtained before and immediately after CCRTx. The third CEUS was obtained at one month after CCRTx was completed. Response was assessed at three months after CCRTx based on RECIST 1.1. Quantitative imaging biomarkers measured with CEUS and MRI were compared between groups. A cutoff value was calculated with ROC analysis. Overall survival (OS) was compared by the Breslow method. Results: Twenty-five patients were categorized into the non-progression group and five patients were categorized into the progression group. Peak enhancement of the first CEUS before CCRTx (PE1) was significantly lower in the non-progression group (median, 18.6%; IQR, 20.9%) than that in the progression group (median, 59.1%; IQR, 13.5%; P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in other quantitative biomarkers between the two groups. On ROC analysis, with a cutoff value of 42.6% in PE1, the non-progression group was diagnosed with a sensitivity of 90.9% and a specificity of 100%. OS was also significantly longer in patients with PE1 < 42.6% (P = 0.014). Conclusion: Early treatment response and OS could be predicted by PE on CEUS before CCRTx in patients with HCC.

Keywords

References

  1. Johnson PJ. Non-surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. HPB (Oxford) 2005;7:50-55 https://doi.org/10.1080/13651820410024076
  2. Bruix J, Reig M, Sherman M. Evidence-based diagnosis, staging, and treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2016;150:835-853 https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2015.12.041
  3. Lee HS, Choi GH, Choi JS, et al. Surgical resection after down-staging of locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by localized concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:3646-3653 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3652-3
  4. Choi Y, Kim JW, Cha H, Han KH, Seong J. Overall response of both intrahepatic tumor and portal vein tumor thrombosis is a good prognostic factor for hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy. J Radiat Res 2014;55:113-120 https://doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrt082
  5. Cho IR, Lee HW, Song KJ, et al. Conditional survival estimate in patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B/C hepatocellular carcinoma treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with/without concurrent radiotherapy. Oncotarget 2017;8:79914-79926 https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.20321
  6. Chong JU, Choi GH, Han DH, et al. Downstaging with localized concurrent chemoradiotherapy can identify optimal surgical candidates in hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus. Ann Surg Oncol 2018;25:3308-3315 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6653-9
  7. Han DH, Joo DJ, Kim MS, et al. Living donor liver transplantation for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis after concurrent chemoradiation therapy. Yonsei Med J 2016;57:1276-1281 https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2016.57.5.1276
  8. Jiang T, Zhu AX, Sahani DV. Established and novel imaging biomarkers for assessing response to therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2013;58:169-177 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2012.08.022
  9. Hsu CY, Shen YC, Yu CW, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers predict survival and response in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib and metronomic tegafur/uracil. J Hepatol 2011;55:858-865 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2011.01.032
  10. Zhu AX, Sahani DV, Duda DG, et al. Efficacy, safety, and potential biomarkers of sunitinib monotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II study. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:3027-3035 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.9908
  11. Wang D, Gaba RC, Jin B, et al. Perfusion reduction at transcatheter intraarterial perfusion MR imaging: a promising intraprocedural biomarker to predict transplantfree survival during chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 2014;272:587-597 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14131311
  12. Liang PC, Ch'ang HJ, Hsu C, Chen LT, Shih TT, Liu TW. Perfusion parameters of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging predict outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma receiving radiotherapy with or without thalidomide. Hepatol Int 2015;9:258-268 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12072-014-9557-1
  13. Zhou JH, Cao LH, Zheng W, Liu M, Han F, Li AH. Contrastenhanced gray-scale ultrasound for quantitative evaluation of tumor response to chemotherapy: preliminary results with a mouse hepatoma model. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:W13-17 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4734
  14. Zhou J, Zheng W, Cao L, Liu M, Han F, Li A. Antiangiogenic tumor treatment: noninvasive monitoring with contrast pulse sequence imaging for contrast-enhanced grayscale ultrasound. Acad Radiol 2010;17:646-651 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2010.01.008
  15. Merz M, Komljenovic D, Semmler W, Bauerle T. Quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound for imaging antiangiogenic treatment response in experimental osteolytic breast cancer bone metastases. Invest Radiol 2012;47:422-429 https://doi.org/10.1097/rli.0b013e31824f635a
  16. Chung YE, Kim KW. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: advance and current status in abdominal imaging. Ultrasonography 2015;34:3-18 https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.14034
  17. Minami Y, Kudo M. Imaging modalities for assessment of treatment response to nonsurgical hepatocellular carcinoma therapy: contrast-enhanced US, CT, and MRI. Liver Cancer 2015;4:106-114 https://doi.org/10.1159/000367733
  18. Han KH, Seong J, Kim JK, Ahn SH, Lee DY, Chon CY. Pilot clinical trial of localized concurrent chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein thrombosis. Cancer 2008;113:995-1003 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23684
  19. Kim KA, Park MS, Ji HJ, et al. Diffusion and perfusion MRI prediction of progression-free survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;39:286-292 https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24161
  20. Korpisalo P, Hytonen JP, Laitinen JT, et al. Ultrasound imaging with bolus delivered contrast agent for the detection of angiogenesis and blood flow irregularities. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2014;307:H1226-1232 https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.00315.2013
  21. Park HJ, Griffin RJ, Hui S, Levitt SH, Song CW. Radiationinduced vascular damage in tumors: implications of vascular damage in ablative hypofractionated radiotherapy (SBRT and SRS). Radiat Res 2012;177:311-327 https://doi.org/10.1667/RR2773.1
  22. Rockwell S, Dobrucki IT, Kim EY, Marrison ST, Vu VT. Hypoxia and radiation therapy: past history, ongoing research, and future promise. Curr Mol Med 2009;9:442-458 https://doi.org/10.2174/156652409788167087
  23. Zahra MA, Hollingsworth KG, Sala E, Lomas DJ, Tan LT. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a predictor of tumour response to radiotherapy. Lancet Oncol 2007;8:63-74 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(06)71012-9
  24. Niizawa G, Ikegami T, Matsuzaki Y, et al. Monitoring of hepatocellular carcinoma, following proton radiotherapy, with contrast-enhanced color Doppler ultrasonography. J Gastroenterol 2005;40:283-290 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-004-1538-z
  25. Thng CH, Koh TS, Collins D, Koh DM. Perfusion imaging in liver MRI. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2014;22:417-432 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2014.04.011
  26. Chen BB, Hsu CY, Yu CW, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison with the liver parenchyma and correlation with the survival of patients receiving systemic therapy. Radiology 2016;281:454-464 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016152659
  27. Hsu C, Yang TS, Huo TI, et al. Vandetanib in patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Hepatol 2012;56:1097-1103 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.013
  28. Liang PC, Ch'ang HJ, Hsu C, Tseng SS, Shih TT, Wu Liu T. Dynamic MRI signals in the second week of radiotherapy relate to treatment outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma: a preliminary result. Liver Int 2007;27:516-528 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-3231.2007.01456.x