Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Volumetric assessment of tumor size changes in pediatric low-grade gliomas: feasibility and comparison with linear measurements

  • Paediatric Neuroradiology
  • Published:
Neuroradiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We report a retrospective comparison between bi-dimensional RANO criteria and manual volumetric segmentation (MVS) in pediatric low-grade gliomas.

Methods

MRI FLAIR or T1 post contrast images were used for assessment of tumor response. Seventy patients were included in this single center study, for each patient two scans were assessed (“time 0” and “end of therapy”) and response to therapy was evaluated for both methods. Inter-reader variability and average time for volumetric assessment were also calculated.

Results

Fourteen (20%) of the 70 patients had discordant results in terms of response assessment between the bi-dimensional measurements and MVS. All volumetric response assessments were in keeping with the subjective analysis of tumor (radiology report). Of the 14 patients, 6 had stable disease (SD) on MVS and progressive disease (PD) on 2D assessment, 5 patients had SD on MVS and partial response (PR) on 2D assessment, 2 patients had PD on MVS and SD on 2D assessment, and 1 patient had PR on MVS and SD on 2D analysis. The number of discordant results rises to 21(30%) if minor response is integrated in the response assessment. MVS was relatively fast and showed high inter-reader concordance.

Conclusion

Our analysis shows that therapeutic response classification may change in a significant number of children by performing a volumetric tumor assessment. Furthermore, MVS is not particularly time consuming and has very good inter-reader concordance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Colin C, Padovani L, Chappé C et al (2013) Outcome analysis of childhood pilocytic astrocytomas: a retrospective study of 148 cases at a single institution. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 39:693–705. https://doi.org/10.1111/nan.12013

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gnekow AK, Falkenstein F, von Hornstein S et al (2012) Long-term follow-up of the multicenter, multidisciplinary treatment study HIT-LGG-1996 for low-grade glioma in children and adolescents of the German Speaking Society of Pediatric Oncology and Hematology. Neuro Oncol 14:1265–1284. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nos202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Ater JL, Zhou T, Holmes E et al (2012) Randomized study of two chemotherapy regimens for treatment of low-grade glioma in young children: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 30:2641–2647. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.36.6054

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Warren KE, Poussaint TY, Vezina G et al (2013) Challenges with defining response to antitumor agents in pediatric neuro-oncology: a report from the response assessment in pediatric neuro-oncology (RAPNO) working group. Pediatr Blood Cancer 60:1397–1401. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.24562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC, Cairncross JG (1990) Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 8:1277–1280

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA et al (2010) Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 28:1963–1972. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pope WB, Hessel C (2011) Response assessment in neuro-oncology criteria: implementation challenges in multicenter neuro-oncology trials. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 32:794–797. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2582

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sievert AJ, Fisher MJ (2009) Pediatric low-grade gliomas. J Child Neurol 24:1397–1408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073809342005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Laithier V, Grill J, Le Deley M-C et al (2003) Progression-free survival in children with optic pathway tumors: dependence on age and the quality of the response to chemotherapy—results of the first French prospective study for the French Society of Pediatric Oncology. J Clin Oncol 21:4572–4578. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.03.043

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Packer RJ, Ater J, Allen J et al (1997) Carboplatin and vincristine chemotherapy for children with newly diagnosed progressive low-grade gliomas. J Neurosurg 86:747–754. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1997.86.5.0747

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jaspan T, Morgan PS, Warmuth-Metz M et al (2016) Response assessment in pediatric neuro-oncology: implementation and expansion of the RANO Criteria in a randomized phase II trial of pediatric patients with Newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 37:1581–1587. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4782

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van den Bent MJ, Wefel JS, Schiff D et al (2011) Response assessment in neuro-oncology (a report of the RANO group): assessment of outcome in trials of diffuse low-grade gliomas. Lancet Oncol 12:583–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70057-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Shah GD, Kesari S, Xu R et al (2006) Comparison of linear and volumetric criteria in assessing tumor response in adult high-grade gliomas. Neuro Oncol 8:38–46. https://doi.org/10.1215/S1522851705000529

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kanaly CW, Mehta AI, Ding D et al (2014) A novel, reproducible, and objective method for volumetric magnetic resonance imaging assessment of enhancing glioblastoma. J Neurosurg 121:536–542. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.4.JNS121952

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Warren KE, Patronas N, Aikin AA et al (2001) Comparison of one-, two-, and three-dimensional measurements of childhood brain tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:1401–1405

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kilday J-P, Branson H, Rockel C et al (2015) Tumor volumetric measurements in surgically inaccessible pediatric low-grade glioma. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 37:e31–e36. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPH.0000000000000168

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lassaletta A, Scheinemann K, Zelcer SM et al (2016) Phase II weekly vinblastine for chemotherapy-Naïve children with progressive low-grade glioma: a Canadian pediatric brain tumor consortium study. J Clin Oncol 34:3537–3543. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.68.1585

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Henson JW, Ulmer S, Harris GJ (2008) Brain tumor imaging in clinical trials. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 29:419–424. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A0963

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang M-Y, Cheng J-L, Han Y-H et al (2012) Measurement of tumor size in adult glioblastoma: classical cross-sectional criteria on 2D MRI or volumetric criteria on high resolution 3D MRI? Eur J Radiol 81:2370–2374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.05.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Iliadis G, Selviaridis P, Kalogera-Fountzila A et al (2009) The importance of tumor volume in the prognosis of patients with glioblastoma: comparison of computerized volumetry and geometric models. Strahlenther Onkol 185:743–750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-009-2015-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmidt KF, Ziu M, Schmidt NO et al (2004) Volume reconstruction techniques improve the correlation between histological and in vivo tumor volume measurements in mouse models of human gliomas. J Neurooncol 68:207–215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Galanis E, Buckner JC, Maurer MJ et al (2006) Validation of neuroradiologic response assessment in gliomas: measurement by RECIST, two-dimensional, computer-assisted tumor area, and computer-assisted tumor volume methods. Neuro Oncol 8:156–165. https://doi.org/10.1215/15228517-2005-005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Reuter M, Gerstner ER, Rapalino O et al (2014) Impact of MRI head placement on glioma response assessment. J Neurooncol 118:123–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-014-1403-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Gilheeney SW, Kieran MW (2012) Differences in molecular genetics between pediatric and adult malignant astrocytomas: age matters. Future Oncol 8:549–558. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon.12.51

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mistry M, Zhukova N, Merico D et al (2015) BRAF mutation and CDKN2A deletion define a clinically distinct subgroup of childhood secondary high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol 33:1015–1022. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.58.3922

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Olsen ØE (2015) Why measure tumours? Pediatr Radiol 45:35–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3148-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Ellingson BM, Nguyen HN, Lai A et al (2016) Contrast-enhancing tumor growth dynamics of preoperative, treatment-naive human glioblastoma. Cancer 122:1718–1727. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29957

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Akkus Z, Sedlar J, Coufalova L et al (2015) Semi-automated segmentation of pre-operative low grade gliomas in magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Imaging 15:12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-015-0047-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Dombi E, Solomon J, Gillespie AJ et al (2007) NF1 plexiform neurofibroma growth rate by volumetric MRI: relationship to age and body weight. Neurology 68:643–647. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000250332.89420.e6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Porz N, Habegger S, Meier R et al (2016) Fully automated enhanced tumor compartmentalization: man vs. machine reloaded. PLoS ONE 11:e0165302. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165302

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Bø HK, Solheim O, Jakola AS et al (2017) Intra-rater variability in low-grade glioma segmentation. J Neurooncol 131:393–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-016-2312-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Mrs. Sara Falcone, Senior MR Radiographer, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada.

Author information

Author notes

  1. FD’A and PO’H are joint first authors and contributed equally to this study.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pediatric Neuroradiology, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

    Felice D’Arco, Fatima Dashti & Suzanne Laughlin

  2. Department of Pediatric Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Great Ormond Street Hospital NHS Trust, London, WC1N 3JH, UK

    Felice D’Arco & Giacomo Talenti

  3. Department of Pediatric Oncology, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK

    Patricia O’Hare & Thalia Loka

  4. Division of Pediatric Neuro-oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

    Alvaro Lassaletta, Uri Tabori & Eric Bouffet

  5. National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, UK

    Stefanie Thust

  6. Radiology Unit, “Villa Malta” Hospital, Sarno, Italy

    Giancarlo Messalli

  7. Developmental Imaging and Biophysics Section, Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK

    Patrick Hales

Authors
  1. Felice D’Arco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patricia O’Hare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatima Dashti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alvaro Lassaletta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thalia Loka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Uri Tabori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Giacomo Talenti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Stefanie Thust
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Giancarlo Messalli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Patrick Hales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Eric Bouffet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Suzanne Laughlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Felice D’Arco.

Ethics declarations

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Conflict of interest

ST receives funding support from the National Institute for Health Research, University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

D’Arco, F., O’Hare, P., Dashti, F. et al. Volumetric assessment of tumor size changes in pediatric low-grade gliomas: feasibility and comparison with linear measurements. Neuroradiology 60, 427–436 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-018-1979-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-018-1979-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation