Tumor Response Assessment in Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma: Comparison of Semiautomated Volumetric, Semiautomated
L A Gilligan1,2, M D DeWire-Schottmiller3,2, M Fouladi3,4
1From the Departments of Radiology (L.A.G., J.L.L.).
Background And Purpose:
2D measurements of diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas are limited by variability, and volumetric response criteria are poorly defined. Semiautomated 2D measurements may improve consistency; however, the impact on tumor response assessments is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare manual 2D, semiautomated 2D, and volumetric measurement strategies for diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas.
Materials And Methods:
This study evaluated patients with diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas through a Phase I/II trial (NCT02607124). Clinical 2D cross-product values were derived from manual linear measurements (cross-product = long axis × short axis). By means of dedicated software (mint Lesion), tumor margins were traced and maximum cross-product and tumor volume were automatically derived. Correlation and bias between methods were assessed, and response assessment per measurement strategy was reported.
Results:
Ten patients (median age, 7.6 years) underwent 58 MR imaging examinations. Correlation and mean bias (95% limits) of percentage change in tumor size from prior examinations were the following: clinical and semiautomated cross-product, r = 0.36, -1.5% (-59.9%, 56.8%); clinical cross-product and volume, r = 0.61, -2.1% (-52.0%, 47.8%); and semiautomated cross-product and volume, r = 0.79, 0.6% (-39.3%, 38.1%). Stable disease, progressive disease, and partial response rates per measurement strategy were the following: clinical cross-product, 82%, 18%, 0%; semiautomated cross-product, 54%, 42%, 4%; and volume, 50%, 46%, 4%, respectively.
Conclusions:
Manual 2D cross-product measurements may underestimate tumor size and disease progression compared with semiautomated 2D and volumetric measurements.
