OTHR-06 - Benjamin Jang.mp4
PACS Lesion Tracking Tool provides real time automatic information on brain tumor metastasis growth curves and RECIST criteria
Benjamin Jang, MingDe Lin, Randy Owens, Khaled Bousabarah, Amit Mahajan, Sandra Abi Fadel, Ichiro Ikuta, Irena Tocino, Mariam Aboian
Yale School of Medicine, Connecticut, USA
Objective: Communicating metastatic brain treatment response can be complicated. A widely used method to assess clinical response is called response evaluation criteria in solid tumors or RECIST. In our study, we use a PACS Lesion Tracking Tool (TT) to assess intracranial metastasis using RECIST criteria. We predict that the TT will be superior to the standard radiology reports.
Methods: Nuance ® mPowerTM was used to identify 30 patients with brain metastasis who received brain MRI from 4/2020-4/2021. Patient’s first brain MRI with metastasis was set as baseline and subsequent 3 brain MRI studies were examined. All lesions were measured on post-gadolinium sequence and defined as target lesions or new lesions. The TT was used to measure lesion size over time with creation of growth curves and RECIST outcomes, which include stable disease, progressive disease, partial response, or complete response. Subsequently, RECIST evaluations were compared with radiologic impressions for discrepancy, and further evaluations were made to see if it made a clinical difference in patient management and/or provide additional useful information. These evaluations were given a rating of agree/yes, equivocal, or disagree/no. They were assessed by 3 neuroradiologists.
Results: Number of lesions ranged from 1-27. The assessments from 3 neuroradiologists were averaged. Comparing impression versus RECIST evaluation, the results demonstrated the following: 8/30 disagreement, 4/30 equivocal, and 18/30 agreement. Using more stringent criteria, assessing whether the TT would result in either change in patient management or provide additional useful information, the results were the following: 6/30 yes, 4/30 equivocal, and 20/30 no.
Discussion: In addition to providing real time RECIST criteria evaluations and visually descriptive lesion growth tables, the TT was easy to use. Interpretation of these additional data provided more clarity and was found to be superior to standard radiology report.
Benjamin Jang, MingDe Lin, Randy Owens, Khaled Bousabarah, Amit Mahajan, Sandra Abi Fadel, Ichiro Ikuta, Irena Tocino, Mariam Aboian
Yale School of Medicine, Connecticut, USA
Objective: Communicating metastatic brain treatment response can be complicated. A widely used method to assess clinical response is called response evaluation criteria in solid tumors or RECIST. In our study, we use a PACS Lesion Tracking Tool (TT) to assess intracranial metastasis using RECIST criteria. We predict that the TT will be superior to the standard radiology reports.
Methods: Nuance ® mPowerTM was used to identify 30 patients with brain metastasis who received brain MRI from 4/2020-4/2021. Patient’s first brain MRI with metastasis was set as baseline and subsequent 3 brain MRI studies were examined. All lesions were measured on post-gadolinium sequence and defined as target lesions or new lesions. The TT was used to measure lesion size over time with creation of growth curves and RECIST outcomes, which include stable disease, progressive disease, partial response, or complete response. Subsequently, RECIST evaluations were compared with radiologic impressions for discrepancy, and further evaluations were made to see if it made a clinical difference in patient management and/or provide additional useful information. These evaluations were given a rating of agree/yes, equivocal, or disagree/no. They were assessed by 3 neuroradiologists.
Results: Number of lesions ranged from 1-27. The assessments from 3 neuroradiologists were averaged. Comparing impression versus RECIST evaluation, the results demonstrated the following: 8/30 disagreement, 4/30 equivocal, and 18/30 agreement. Using more stringent criteria, assessing whether the TT would result in either change in patient management or provide additional useful information, the results were the following: 6/30 yes, 4/30 equivocal, and 20/30 no.
Discussion: In addition to providing real time RECIST criteria evaluations and visually descriptive lesion growth tables, the TT was easy to use. Interpretation of these additional data provided more clarity and was found to be superior to standard radiology report.