Zhao, Binsheng

343 Background: Alliance/CALGB 80802, a randomized phase III trial, evaluated sorafenib plus doxorubicin vs. doxorubicin in pts with HCC and showed no improvement in median overall survival (OS) (HR[95CI] 1.05[0.83-1.31]) or PFS (HR[95CI] 0.93[0.75-1.16]). In HCC surrogacy of tumor response with OS remains controversial, in part due to varying criteria used for response evaluation (e.g., RECIST1.1 and mRECIST). We evaluated the performance of several models to predict OS using pretreatment clinical and radiomic variables. Methods: In CALBG 80802, we segmented all measurable tumor lesions on sequential CT scans. A lesion’s imaging phenotype was deciphered with 23 uncorrelated quantitative imaging features measured at baseline and week (wk) 10 (first follow-up). An OS landmark survival analysis was conducted at wk 10. Patients were randomly assigned (3:1) to training (n = 92) and validation (n = 37) sets. In a training set, 6 random forest predictive models (6 signatures) used features that best predicted OS using 3 sets of variables: radiomics only (n = 23), clinical only (n = 9), radiomics and clinical (n = 32). Two time points (baseline only or baseline + wk 10) were assessed. Each signature's output was an individualized prediction and a continuous value ranging from 0 to 1 (from most to least favorable predicted OS). The primary endpoint was to compare these models' performance to predict OS using error rate (Harrell's concordance-index) in the validation set. Results: Of the 6 training signatures evaluated, the one achieving the highest performance in the validation set was an 8-feature signature combining radiomics and clinical variables measured at two time points (baseline + wk 10) with an error rate of 35.6%. The variables [rank of importance] (table) selected by the signature included baseline clinical features (albumin[1], AFP[2], Child-Pugh[4]), baseline radiomics features (component 17[3], component 1[5], component 9[7], tumor volume[8]) and wk 10 radiomics features (delta tumor volume[6]). Variable delta tumor volume [6] used a more enhanced estimation of tumor burden at baseline and a delta tumor volumetric measurement; compared to RECIST1.1 measurement of percentage change in unidimensional measurement of a subset of target lesions. The four quartiles of the signature were significantly associated with OS (Log-Rank, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: The selected combined radiomic and clinical composite signature provided the best prediction for OS in the 80802 study patients’ population. It is a suggested way forward to go beyond single anatomic measurement techniques such as RECIST or mRECIST. [Table: see text]

Abstract As anticancer therapies designed to target specific molecular pathways have been developed, it has become critical to develop methods to assess the response induced by such agents. Although traditional, anatomic CT, and MRI examinations are useful in many settings, increasing evidence suggests that these methods cannot answer the fundamental biologic and physiologic questions essential for assessment and, eventually, prediction of treatment response in the clinical trial setting, especially in the critical period soon after treatment is initiated. To optimally apply advances in quantitative imaging methods to trials of targeted cancer therapy, new infrastructure improvements are needed that incorporate these emerging techniques into the settings where they are most likely to have impact. In this review, we first elucidate the needs for therapeutic response assessment in the era of molecularly targeted therapy and describe how quantitative imaging can most effectively provide scientifically and clinically relevant data. We then describe the tools and methods required to apply quantitative imaging and provide concrete examples of work making these advances practically available for routine application in clinical trials. We conclude by proposing strategies to surmount barriers to wider incorporation of these quantitative imaging methods into clinical trials and, eventually, clinical practice. Our goal is to encourage and guide the oncology community to deploy standardized quantitative imaging techniques in clinical trials to further personalize care for cancer patients and to provide a more efficient path for the development of improved targeted therapies. Clin Cancer Res; 22(2); 284–90. ©2016 AACR.