Rosen, Mark

The Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance Profile for dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI and its longitudinal claims for the precision of a DSC MRI–derived quantitative imaging biomarker to assess the relative cerebral blood volume changes in gliomas are summarized.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. ARST1321 was a phase II study designed to compare the near complete pathologic response rate after preoperative chemoradiation with/without pazopanib in children and adults with intermediate-/high-risk chemotherapy-sensitive body wall/extremity non-Rhabdomyosarcoma Soft Tissue Sarcoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02180867 ). Enrollment was stopped early following a predetermined interim analysis that found the rate of near complete pathologic response to be significantly greater with the addition of pazopanib. As a planned secondary aim of the study, the outcome data for this cohort were analyzed. Eight-five eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive (regimen A) or not receive (regimen B) pazopanib in combination with ifosfamide and doxorubicin + preoperative radiotherapy followed by primary resection at week 13 and then further chemotherapy at week 25. As of December 31, 2021, at a median survivor follow-up of 3.3 years (range, 0.1-5.8 years), the 3-year event-free survival for all patients in the intent-to-treat analysis was 52.5% (95% CI, 34.8 to 70.2) for regimen A and 50.6% (95% CI, 32 to 69.2) for regimen B ( P = .8677, log-rank test); the 3-year overall survival was 75.7% (95% CI, 59.7 to 91.7) for regimen A and 65.4% (95% CI, 48.1 to 82.7) for regimen B ( P = .1919, log-rank test). Although the rate of near complete pathologic response was significantly greater with the addition of pazopanib, outcomes were not statistically significantly different between the two regimens.

PURPOSE Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a newly established standard treatment for rectal adenocarcinoma. Current methods to communicate magnitudes of regression during TNT are subjective and imprecise. Magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (MR-TRG) is an existing, but rarely used, regression grading system. Prospective validation of MR-TRG correlation with pathologic response in patients undergoing TNT is lacking. Utility of adding diffusion-weighted imaging to MR-TRG is also unknown. METHODS We conducted a multi-institutional prospective imaging substudy within NRG-GI002 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02921256 ) examining the ability of MR-based imaging to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) and correlate MR-TRG with the pathologic neoadjuvant response score (NAR). Serial MRIs were needed from 110 patients. Three radiologists independently, then collectively, reviewed each MRI for complete response (mriCR), which was tested for positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, and specificity with pCR. MR-TRG was examined for association with the pathologic NAR score. All team members were blinded to pathologic data. RESULTS A total of 121 patients from 71 institutions met criteria: 28% were female (n = 34), 84% White (n = 101), and median age was 55 (24-78 years). Kappa scores for T- and N-stage after TNT were 0.38 and 0.88, reflecting fair agreement and near-perfect agreement, respectively. Calling an mriCR resulted in a kappa score of 0.82 after chemotherapy and 0.56 after TNT reflected near-perfect agreement and moderate agreement, respectively. MR-TRG scores were associated with pCR ( P < .01) and NAR ( P < .0001), PPV for pCR was 40% (95% CI, 26 to 53), and NPV was 84% (95% CI, 75 to 94). CONCLUSION MRI alone is a poor tool to distinguish pCR in rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing TNT. However, the MR-TRG score presents a now validated method, correlated with pathologic NAR, which can objectively measure regression magnitude during TNT.

TPS7 Background: Penis cancer is a rare but potentially fatal disease. A limited body of evidence exists on which to base the majority of management decisions for patients with regional nodal metastases. Five-year survival for patients with a single involved inguinal lymph node treated with surgery alone is approximately 80%, whilst it ranges from 0 to 12% for patients with pelvic node involvement (N3). Additional strategies are required for the management regionally-advanced disease. InPACT (NCT02305654) aims to determine prospectively the relative benefits and sequencing of surgery, chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy in the management of patients with penis cancer who present with palpable or radiologically evident inguinal lymph node metastases. InPACT addresses the following questions: Is there a role for neoadjuvant therapy and, if so, which of the two options (chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) before surgery gives superior outcomes? Among patients whose inguinal node histology predicts a high risk of recurrence, does prophylactic pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) plus chemoradiation to the inguinal and pelvic fields improve survival compared to chemoradiation alone? Methods: A Bayesian trial design aims to include a wide population of patients and incorporates two randomisations: InPACT-neoadjuvant and InPACT-pelvis. Participants are stratified by disease burden (extent of nodal involvement), by the presence or absence of high-risk radiological features, and by GFR. Participants with high disease burden where neoadjuvant treatment is thought to be indicated are randomised to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Participants with intermediate disease burden are randomised to one of 3 arms: Surgery alone or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to surgery. Participants in the low-burden group proceed directly to surgery. Participants with postoperative inguinal node pathology that shows high-risk features may then proceed to InPACT-pelvis where randomisation is between adjuvant chemoradiotherapy ± PLND for those not previously treated with chemoradiotherapy & between PLND & observation for those previously treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The study aims to recruit 200 participants. The primary outcome measure is overall survival, with secondary outcome measures of disease-specific survival, disease-free survival, and freedom from locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. Feasibility, toxicity, the type/extent of surgical complications, and quality of life will be assessed as secondary endpoints for all the InPACT treatment arms. To October 2021, 65 participants have been recruited with centres open in the UK, US and Canada. Clinical trial information: NCT02305654.

BackgroundUncertainty regarding the reproducibility of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) hampers the use of quantitative diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) in evaluation of the prostate with magnetic resonance imaging MRI. The quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) profile for quantitative DWI claims a within‐subject coefficient of variation (wCV) for prostate lesion ADC of 0.17. Improved understanding of ADC reproducibility would aid the use of quantitative diffusion in prostate MRI evaluation.PurposeEvaluation of the repeatability (same‐day) and reproducibility (multi‐day) of whole‐prostate and focal‐lesion ADC assessment in a multi‐site setting.Study TypeProspective multi‐institutional.SubjectsTwenty‐nine males, ages 53 to 80 (median 63) years, following diagnosis of prostate cancer, 10 with focal lesions.Field Strength/Sequence3T, single‐shot spin‐echo diffusion‐weighted echo‐planar sequence with four b‐values.AssessmentSites qualified for the study using an ice‐water phantom with known ADC. Readers performed DWI analyses at visit 1 (“V1”) and visit 2 (“V2,” 2–14 days after V1), where V2 comprised scans before (“V2pre”) and after (“V2post”) a “coffee‐break” interval with subject removal and repositioning. A single reader segmented the whole prostate. Two readers separately placed region‐of‐interests for focal lesions.Statistical TestsReproducibility and repeatability coefficients for whole prostate and focal lesions derived from median pixel ADC. We estimated the wCV and 95% confidence interval using a variance stabilizing transformation and assessed interreader reliability of focal lesion ADC using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).ResultsThe ADC biases from b0–b600 and b0–b800 phantom scans averaged 1.32% and 1.44%, respectively; mean b‐value dependence was 0.188%. Repeatability and reproducibility of whole prostate median pixel ADC both yielded wCVs of 0.033 (N = 29). In 10 subjects with an evaluable focal lesion, the individual reader wCVs were 0.148 and 0.074 (repeatability) and 0.137 and 0.078 (reproducibility). All time points demonstrated good to excellent interreader reliability for focal lesion ADC (ICCV1 = 0.89; ICCV2pre = 0.76; ICCV2post = 0.94).Data ConclusionThis study met the QIBA claim for prostate ADC. Test–retest repeatability and multi‐day reproducibility were largely equivalent. Interreader reliability for focal lesion ADC was high across time points.Level of Evidence1Technical EfficacyStage 2TOC CategoryPelvis

Abstract Background: In an adaptive randomized trial, when new treatment combinations are being tested, it is important to be able to identify patients who are progressing on treatment so that they can be changed to a different therapeutic regimen. We know that even within the molecularly high risk patients in I-SPY 2, there is considerable variation in biology. In this study, we will present results of using MRI-calculated functional tumor volume (FTV) to identify tumor progression for each breast cancer subtype. Methods: Patients (n=990) enrolled in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL who were randomized to the graduated experimental drug arms or controls from 2010 to 2016 were analyzed. Four MRI exams were performed for each patient: pre-NAC (T0), after 3 weeks of NAC (T1), between regimens (T2), and post-NAC (T3). Functional tumor volume (FTV) was calculated at each exam by summing voxels meeting enhancement thresholds. Tumor progression at T1, T2 or T3 was identified by a positive FTV change relative to T0. Visual inspection was used to exclude false progression due to strong background parenchymal enhancement post-contrast, prominent vessels, motion, or insufficient image quality. pCR was defined as no invasive disease in the breast and lymph nodes. Negative predictive value for pCR was defined as:NPV=number of true non-pCRs / number of patients with MRI assessed tumor progressions, where “true non-pCRs” referred to patients who were non-pCRs at surgery and were assessed as progressors by MRI. The analysis was performed in the full cohort and in sub-cohorts defined by HR and HER2 statuses. Results: Out of 990 patients, 878 had pCR outcome data (pCR or non-pCR, pCR rate = 35%). Total and non-pCR numbers for each subtype, number of patients with tumor progression assessed by MRI at T1, T2, and T3, and NPVs, are shown in Table 1. In the full cohort, the NPV increased consistently over treatment, from T1 (NPV=83%) to T2 (93%), and to T3 (100%). The HER2+ cancer subtypes showed fewer MRI-assessed tumor progressions than HER2- subtypes: e.g. 10/209 (5%) vs. 108/669 (16%) at T1. NPV was 100% for HER2+ subtypes at T1 and T2 except for a single misclassification of a HR- tumor at T1. Only 6 tumor progressors, all HER2- were identified at T3, and all were confirmed at surgery as non-pCRs (NPV=100%). For HR+/HER2-, the NPV increased slightly from 89% at T1 to 91% at T2, while triple negative subtype had a more substantial increase, from 78% to 92%. Conclusions: Our study showed strong association between tumor progressors assessed by MRI with true non-pCRs after NAC. For HER2+ tumors, although MRI progressors are rare, they strongly indicate non-pCR at all treatment time points, while HER2- subtypes show more accurate results later in treatment. We are evaluating MRI change at 6 weeks to determine if that time point is sufficient to predict progressors. Table 1 MRI assessed tumor progression at different treatment time pointN/non-pCRs/%non-pCRMRI assessed tumor progressionT1 (after 3 weeks)T2 (inter-regimen)T3 (post-NAC)NNPV (%)NNPV (%)NNPV (%)Full cohort878/572/65%11883.14192.76100%HR+/HER2-344/280/81%4588.91190.93100%HR+/HER2+134/85/63%610021000N/AHR-/HER2+75/23/31%47521000N/Atriple negative325/184/57%6377.82692.33100% Citation Format: Wen Li, Natsuko Onishi, David C Newitt, Jessica Gibbs, Lisa J Wilmes, Ella F Jones, Bonnie N Joe, Laura S Sit, Christina Yau, A. Jo Chien, Elissa Price, Kathy S Albain, Theresa Kuritza, Kevin Morley, Judy C Boughey, Kathy Brandt, Sadia Choudhery, Amy S Clark, Mark Rosen, Elizabeth S McDonald, Anthony D Elias, Dulcy Wolverton, Kelly Fountain, David M Euhus, Heather S Han, Bethany Niell, Jennifer Drukteinis, Julie E Lang, Janice Lu, Jane L Meisel, Zaha Mitri, Rita Nanda, Donald W Northfelt, Tara Sanft, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Rebecca K Viscusi, Anne M Wallace, Douglas Yee, Rachel Yung, Smita M Asare, Michelle E Melisko, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S Rugo, Richard Schwab, W. Fraser Symmans, Laura J van't Veer, Donald A Berry, Angela DeMichele, Hiroyuki Abe, Deepa Sheth, Kirsten K Edmiston, Erin D Ellis, Richard Ha, Ralph Wynn, Erin P Crane, Charlotte Dillis, Michael Nelson, An Church, Claudine Isaacs, Qamar J Khan, Karen Y Oh, Neda Jafarian, Dae Hee Bang, Christiane Mullins, Stefanie Woodard, Kathryn W Zamora, Haydee Ojeda-Fornier, Pulin Sheth, Linda Hovanessian-Larsen, Mohammad Eghtedari, Michael Spektor, Marina Giurescu, Mary S Newell, Michael A Cohen, Elise Berman, Constance Lehman, William Smith, Kim Fitzpatrick, Marisa H Borders, Wei Yang, Basak Dogan, Sally Goudreau, Thelma Brown, Laura J Esserman, Nola M Hylton. Breast cancer subtype specific association of pCR with MRI assessed tumor volume progression during NAC in the I-SPY 2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD9-04.

Abstract Background: Strong background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) may cause overestimation in tumor volume measured from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI, which may adversely affect the ability of MR tumor volume to predict treatment outcome for patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Specifically, an overestimation of tumor volume can result in misclassification of patients with complete pathologic response (pCR) as non-responders, leading to less confidence in MRI prediction. As well, overestimation of extent of disease might lead to more aggressive surgical therapy than necessary. This study investigated whether high BPE in the contralateral breast influences the predictive performance of MRI-measured functional tumor volume (FTV) for patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing NAC. Methods: patients (n=990) enrolled in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL who were randomized to the graduated experimental drug arms or controls from 2010 to 2016 were analyzed. Each patient had 4 MRI exams: pre-NAC (T0), after 3 weeks of NAC (T1), between NAC regimens (T2), and post-NAC (T3). FTV was calculated at each MRI exam by summing voxels meeting enhancement thresholds. Background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) in the contralateral breast was calculated automatically as mean percentage enhancement on the early (nominal 150sec post-contrast) image in the fibroglandular tissue segmented from 5 continuous axial slices centered in the inferior-to-superior stack. For each treatment time point, patients having both FTV and BPE measurements were included in the analysis. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was estimated as the association between FTV and pCR at T1, T2, and T3. The analysis was conducted in the full patient cohort and in sub-cohorts defined by hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status. In each patient cohort, a cut-off BPE value was selected to classify patients with high vs. low BPE by testing AUCs estimated with low-BPE patients reached maximum when the cut-off value varied from median to maximum in steps of 10%. Results: Out of 990 patients, 878 had pCR outcome data (pCR or non-pCR, pCR rate = 35%). Table 1 shows the number of patients, pCR rate, and AUC of FTV for predicting pCR using all patients available vs. a subset patients with low BPE (&lt; BPE cut-off). In the full cohort, AUC increased slightly across all time points after patients with high BPE were removed. In the HR+/HER2- subtype, AUC increased at T1 after removal of cases with high BPE (0.65 vs. 0.71). For HR-/HER2+, AUC increased substantially after removal of high BPE cases (0.65 to 0.86 at T1, 0.71 to 0.87 at T2, and 0.71 to 0.89 at T3), with greater improvement at the early time point (T1) compared to later time points (T2 and T3). Only a slight improvement in the AUC was observed in the HR+/HER2+ and HR-/HER2- subtypes across all time points. Conclusions: High background parenchymal enhancement adversely affected the predictive performance of functional tumor volume measured by DCE-MRI, at early treatment time point for HR+/HER2- and across all time points for HR-/HER2+ cancer subtype. The adverse effect might be offset using subtype-optimized enhancement threshold in calculating functional tumor volume. Table 1 Effect of BPE on the prediction of pCR using FTV at various treatment time pointsT1T2T3npCR rateAUCBPE cut-offnpCR rateAUCBPE cut-offnpCR rateAUCBPE cut-offFullAll64734%0.662762334%0.701761134%0.6925Subset45334%0.6831133%0.7230534%0.72HR+/HER2-All26218%0.651924918%0.718225518%0.7519Subset13118%0.7124818%0.7120419%0.76HR+/HER2+All10636%0.642110538%0.62269634%0.7120Subset5332%0.668438%0.665740%0.73HR-/HER2+All5175%0.65204774%0.71204973%0.7116Subset3073%0.862871%0.872475%0.89HR-/HER2-All22842%0.682822243%0.751821143%0.6916Subset15940%0.7111137%0.7810540%0.75 Citation Format: Wen Li, Natsuko Onishi, David C Newitt, Roy Harnish, Ella F Jones, Lisa J Wilmes, Jessica Gibbs, Elissa Price, Bonnie N Joe, A. Jo Chien, Donald A Berry, Judy C Boughey, Kathy S Albain, Amy S Clark, Kirsten K Edmiston, Anthony D Elias, Erin D Ellis, David M Euhus, Heather S Han, Claudine Isaacs, Qamar J Khan, Julie E Lang, Janice Lu, Jane L Meisel, Zaha Mitri, Rita Nanda, Donald W Northfelt, Tara Sanft, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Rebecca K Viscusi, Anne M Wallace, Douglas Yee, Rachel Yung, Michelle E Melisko, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S Rugo, Richard Schwab, W. Fraser Symmans, Laura J van't Veer, Christina Yau, Smita M Asare, Angela DeMichele, Sally Goudreau, Hiroyuki Abe, Deepa Sheth, Dulcy Wolverton, Kelly Fountain, Richard Ha, Ralph Wynn, Erin P Crane, Charlotte Dillis, Theresa Kuritza, Kevin Morley, Michael Nelson, An Church, Bethany Niell, Jennifer Drukteinis, Karen Y Oh, Neda Jafarian, Kathy Brandt, Sadia Choudhery, Dae Hee Bang, Christiane Mullins, Stefanie Woodard, Kathryn W Zamora, Haydee Ojeda-Fornier, Mohammad Eghedari, Pulin Sheth, Linda Hovanessian-Larsen, Mark Rosen, Elizabeth S McDonald, Michael Spektor, Marina Giurescu, Mary S Newell, Michael A Cohen, Elise Berman, Constance Lehman, William Smith, Kim Fitzpatrick, Marisa H Borders, Wei Yang, Basak Dogan, Laura J Esserman, Nola M Hylton. The effect of background parenchymal enhancement on the predictive performance of functional tumor volume measured in MRI [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-02-01.

Abstract Innovations and Challenges in Renal Cancer, chaired by Michael B. Atkins, was held April 28 to 29, 2006 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The conference brought together leading experts in the fields of cancer research, medical oncology, urology, immunology, radiology, and immunotherapy, with the goal of advancing the field of renal cancer treatment by critiquing new data from ongoing clinical trials and stimulating communication among those involved in basic and clinical research. The conference proceedings published in this educational supplement to Clinical Cancer Research are intended to provide timely information and recommendations on important aspects of renal cancer genetics and biology and advances in prognostic classification and treatment.