IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0252041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utilization of target lesion heterogeneity for treatment efficacy assessment in late stage lung cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Dung-Tsa Chen
  • Wenyaw Chan
  • Zachary J Thompson
  • Ram Thapa
  • Amer A Beg
  • Andreas N Saltos
  • Alberto A Chiappori
  • Jhanelle E Gray
  • Eric B Haura
  • Trevor A Rose
  • Ben Creelan

Abstract

Rationale: Recent studies have discovered several unique tumor response subgroups outside of response classification by Response Evaluation Criteria for Solid Tumors (RECIST), such as mixed response and oligometastasis. These subtypes have a distinctive property, lesion heterogeneity defined as diversity of tumor growth profiles in RECIST target lesions. Furthermore, many cancer clinical trials have been activated to evaluate various treatment options for heterogeneity-related subgroups (e.g., 29 trials so far listed in clinicaltrials.gov for cancer patients with oligometastasis). Some of the trials have shown survival benefit by tailored treatment strategies. This evidence presents the unmet need to incorporate lesion heterogeneity to improve RECIST response classification. Method: An approach for Lesion Heterogeneity Classification (LeHeC) was developed using a contemporary statistical approach to assess target lesion variation, characterize patient treatment response, and translate informative evidence to improving treatment strategy. A mixed effect linear model was used to determine lesion heterogeneity. Further analysis was conducted to classify various types of lesion variation and incorporate with RECIST to enhance response classification. A study cohort of 110 target lesions from 36 lung cancer patients was used for evaluation. Results: Due to small sample size issue, the result was exploratory in nature. By analyzing RECIST target lesion data, the LeHeC approach detected a high prevalence (n = 21; 58%) of lesion heterogeneity. Subgroup classification revealed several informative distinct subsets in a descending order of lesion heterogeneity: mix of progression and regression (n = 7), mix of progression and stability (n = 9), mix of regression and stability (n = 5), and non-heterogeneity (n = 15). Evaluation for association of lesion heterogeneity and RECIST best response classification showed lesion heterogeneity commonly occurred in each response group (stable disease: 16/27; 59%; partial response: 3/5; 60%; progression disease: 2/4; 50%). Survival analysis showed a differential trend of overall survival between heterogeneity and non-heterogeneity in RECIST response groups. Conclusion: This is the first study to evaluate lesion heterogeneity, an underappreciated metric, for RECIST application in oncology clinical trials. Results indicated lesion heterogeneity is not an uncommon event. The LeHeC approach could enhance RECIST response classification by utilizing granular lesion level discovery of heterogeneity.

Suggested Citation

  • Dung-Tsa Chen & Wenyaw Chan & Zachary J Thompson & Ram Thapa & Amer A Beg & Andreas N Saltos & Alberto A Chiappori & Jhanelle E Gray & Eric B Haura & Trevor A Rose & Ben Creelan, 2021. "Utilization of target lesion heterogeneity for treatment efficacy assessment in late stage lung cancer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-15, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252041
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252041
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252041&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0252041?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252041. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.