Elsevier

Lung Cancer

Volume 90, Issue 3, December 2015, Pages 433-441
Lung Cancer

Review
Response evaluation in mesothelioma: Beyond RECIST

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.08.012Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Modified RECIST criteria for assessing treatment response have lower inter-study and interobserver variability compared with standard RECIST criteria in malignant mesothelioma.

  • 18FDG-PET imaging can provide functional assessment of disease response. A decrease in SUVmax is associated with treatment response and longer progression free survival.

  • Diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) is a promising functional MRI technique, which can be used to objectively quantify disease burden and tissue cellularity to provide treatment response assessment.

Abstract

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) typically demonstrates a non-spherical growth pattern, so it is often difficult to accurately categorize change in tumour burden using size-based tumour response criteria (e.g., WHO (World Health Organisation), RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours) and modified RECIST). Functional imaging techniques are applied to derive quantitative measurements of tumours, which reflect particular aspects of the tumour pathophysiology. By quantifying how these measurements change with treatment, it is possible to observe treatment effects.

In this review, we survey the existing roles of CT and MRI for the management of MPM, including the currently applied size measurement criteria for the assessment of treatment response. New functional imaging techniques, such as positron emission tomography (PET), diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) that may potentially improve the assessment of treatment response will be highlighted and discussed.

Introduction

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and often aggressive neoplasm that originates from mesothelial cells lining the pleura [1], [2], [3]. In the UK, the incidence of MPM is reportedly 41 per million in 2011, of which males are 4.5 times more affected than females [4]. The pathogenesis of malignant pleural mesothelioma is related to asbestos exposure [1], and the use of asbestos in the developing countries may result in further increase in the global incidence of MPM [5]. There are three major histological subtypes of MPM: epithelioid, sarcomatoid, and mixed or biphasic, among which the sarcomatoid type has the worst prognosis [6]. MPM has a relatively poor outlook, with a median survival of 9–17 months [7].

There are a number of potential contributing factors to the poor disease survival in MPM. First, the disease is usually multifocal at diagnosis with multiple tumour nodules along the pleura and lung fissures at presentation, sometimes also involving the diaphragm and pericardium, rendering a complete surgical resection impossible. Second, despite the known association between asbestos and MPM, there is a long latency between asbestos exposure and the onset of MPM, making it challenging for the life-long surveillance of disease within the at-risk population. Third, conventional chemotherapy has not been very effective for the treatment of these cancers, although promising new targeted therapies are now beginning to emerge. Last but not least, there is still a significant challenge for the accurate quantification of disease burden and the assessment of disease response to treatment. This has undoubtedly had an impact on clinical trial designs in MPM, and the robustness of end-points used to defined disease response or progression in research and clinical practice.

In this review, we will survey the existing roles of CT and MRI for the management of MPM, including the currently applied size measurement criteria (e.g., WHO, RECIST and modified RECIST) for the assessment of treatment response. Functional imaging techniques, such as positron emission tomography (PET), diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) that may potentially improve the assessment of treatment response will be highlighted and discussed.

Section snippets

Growth pattern of MPM: a challenge for imaging

Malignant pleural mesothelioma grows on the pleural surface by sheet-like extension instead of producing spherical lesions, and this growth pattern leads to an irregular rind-like tumour encasing the lung [8] (Fig. 1). The disease frequently extends to or invades the thoracic wall, the diaphragm, the mediastinum [8], [9], [10]. The tumour can also spread along interlobar fissures across the mediastinum to the opposite pleura, or through the diaphragm into the peritoneum and / or adjacent organs

The roles of conventional CT and MR imaging

Currently, CT is routinely used for the diagnosis, staging, and treatment planning of MPM due to its wide availability and relatively low cost [11], [12]. At diagnosis, the main CT findings include unilateral pleural effusion, nodular pleural thickening and thickening of the interloblar fissure [13]. However, CT is limited for detecting early local tumour extension, including chest wall invasion, transdiaphragmatic spread and small lymph node metastases [14].

MRI has superior soft tissue

Assessing treatment response using size measurement criteria: WHO, RECIST and modified RECIST

In the 1980s, the World Health Organisation (WHO) proposed using the product of the bi-dimensional tumour diameters as the basis for assessing tumour shrinkage after treatment [20]. This was further simplified by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria in the 1990s, when a single maximum axial tumour diameter measurement was proposed [21]. More recently, the RECIST 1.1 criteria, a revision of the original RECIST, are being widely adopted as imaging end-point in

Response assessment using volumetry on CT and MRI

Disease burden before and after treatment has been measured by volumetry on CT or MR images with encouraging results [30], [34], [35], [36], [37]. These studies applied segmentation techniques to the CT or MR images to estimate the total amount of disease present within a hemithorax. In a study of 57 patients with MPM treated with chemotherapy, response assessment was evaluated by CT volumetry, WHO and modified RECIST criteria [34]. The authors found that response defined by CT volumetry

Beyond RECIST: response assessment using functional imaging techniques

Recognizing the inherent limitations of size-based tumour response criteria, particularly in the context of MPM, there is considerable interest in using functional or molecular imaging techniques to assess treatment effectiveness. Functional imaging techniques are applied to derive quantitative measurements of tumours, which reflect particular aspects of the tumour pathophysiology. By quantifying how these measurements change with treatment, it is possible to observe treatment effects.

Conclusions

Despite the known limitations of size measurement response criteria in MPM; WHO, RECIST (1.0 and 1.1) and modified RECIST criteria are still widely used in clinical trials of MPM. This may be because these measurements are relatively simple to undertake, and when performed meticulously, can yield meaningful results that inform on patient outcomes. Nonetheless, current evidence suggests that using the modified RECIST criteria is associated with a lower degree of inter-study and interobserver

Conflict of interests

The authors declare there is no conflict of interests.

Acknowlegements

We acknowledge the CR-UK and EPSRC support to the Cancer Imaging Centre at ICR and RMH in association with MRC & Department of Health C1060/A10334, C1060/A16464, NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedicine Research Centre and the Clinical Research Facility in Imaging.

References (76)

  • M.J. Byrne et al.

    Modified RECIST criteria for assessment of response in malignant pleural mesothelioma

    Ann. Oncol.

    (2004)
  • A.S. Tsao

    A practical guide of the Southwest Oncology Group to measure malignant pleural mesothelioma tumors by RECIST and modified RECIST criteria

    J. Thorac. Oncol.

    (2011)
  • K. Nackaerts et al.

    A practical guide to measure “all” malignant pleural mesothelioma tumors by modified RECIST criteria?

    J. Thorac. Oncol .

    (2011)
  • S.G. Armato et al.

    Observer variability in mesothelioma tumor thickness measurements: defining minimally measurable lesions

    J. Thorac. Oncol.

    (2014)
  • J.K. Blayney

    Response to chemotherapy is predictive in relation to longer overall survival in an individual patient combined-analysis with pleural mesothelioma

    Eur. J. Cancer

    (2012)
  • C. Bech et al.

    Chemotherapy induced pathologic complete response in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a review and case report

    J. Thorac. Oncol.

    (2010)
  • G. Ak

    Three-dimensional evaluation of chemotherapy response in malignant pleural mesothelioma

    Eur. J. Radiol.

    (2010)
  • Z.E. Labby

    Disease volumes as a marker for patient response in malignant pleural mesothelioma

    Ann. Oncol.

    (2013)
  • Z.E. Labby

    Lung volume measurements as a surrogate marker for patient response in malignant pleural mesothelioma

    J. Thorac. Oncol.

    (2013)
  • J. Zubeldia et al.

    11. evaluation of patients with known mesothelioma with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and PET. Comparison with computed tomography

    Clin. Positron. Imaging

    (2000)
  • A. Niccoli-Asabella

    18F-FDG PET/CT in suspected recurrences of epithelial malignant pleural mesothelioma in asbestos-fibers-exposed patients (comparison to standard diagnostic follow-up)

    Clin. Imaging

    (2013)
  • R.M. Flores

    The role of PET in the surgical management of malignant pleural mesothelioma

    Lung Cancer

    (2005)
  • K. Kadota

    High SUVmax on FDG-PET indicates pleomorphic subtype in epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma: supportive evidence to reclassify pleomorphic as nonepithelioid histology

    J. Thorac. Oncol.

    (2012)
  • N.G. Schaefer

    Continued pemetrexed and platin-based chemotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT

    Eur. J. Radiol.

    (2012)
  • T. Henzler

    Diffusion and perfusion MRI of the lung and mediastinum

    Eur. J. Radiol.

    (2010)
  • S.G. Armato et al.

    Imaging in pleural mesothelioma: a review of the 11th International Conference of the International Mesothelioma Interest Group

    Lung Cancer

    (2013)
  • F.L. Giesel

    Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a feasibility study of noninvasive assessment, therapeutic follow-up, and possible predictor of improved outcome

    CHEST J.

    (2006)
  • F.L. Giesel

    Pharmacokinetic analysis of malignant pleural mesothelioma-initial results of tumor microcirculation and its correlation to microvessel density (CD-34)

    Acad. Radiol.

    (2008)
  • J.L. Mulshine

    Role of the quantitative imaging biomarker alliance in optimizing ct for the evaluation of lung cancer screen–detected nodules

    J. Am. Coll. Radiol.

    (2015)
  • B.W. Robinson et al.

    Advances in malignant mesothelioma

    New Engl. J. Med.

    (2005)
  • R.R. Gill

    Diffusion-weighted MRI of malignant pleural mesothelioma: preliminary assessment of apparent diffusion coefficient in histologic subtypes

    Am. J. Roentgenol.

    (2010)
  • J. Broncano

    Functional imaging of malignant pleural mesothelioma and other pleural and chest wall lesions

    In: Functional Imaging in Oncology

    (2014)
  • CRUK. Mesothelioma incidence statistics. 2014; Available from:...
  • A.S. Tsao

    Malignant pleural mesothelioma

    J. Clin. Oncol.

    (2009)
  • M.G. Lansberg

    Comparison of diffusion-weighted MRI and CT in acute stroke

    Neurology

    (2000)
  • C. Plathow

    Therapy response in malignant pleural mesothelioma-role of MRI using RECIST, modified RECIST and volumetric approaches in comparison with CT

    Eur. Radiol.

    (2008)
  • M.T. Truong

    Malignant pleural mesothelioma: role of CT, MRI, and PET/CT in staging evaluation and treatment considerations

    In: Seminars in Roentgenology

    (2013)
  • L. Cardinale, et al., Diagnostic imaging and workup of malignant pleural...
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text