Anum K Syed1, Chengyue Wu1, Angela M Jarrett1, Anna G Sorace2, John M Virostko1, and Thomas E Yankeelov1
1University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States, 2University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States
Synopsis
We investigate multiparametric
analysis of DW- and DCE-MRI data to identify tumor subregions indicative of
response in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). The
analysis showed significant increases in low vascular perfusion, low
cellularity subregions early in the course of NAT for patients who achieved pathological
complete response and significant decreases in high vascular perfusion, high
cellularity subregions on the border with parenchyma.
High-dimensional
analysis of multimodal MRI data can be utilized to identify subregions of response
within patients and these characterizations of intratumoral heterogeneity can
potentially be used to guide therapy for improved patient outcome.
Introduction
Early measures of response to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT)
could provide an opportunity to replace an ineffective treatment with an
alternative regimen, thereby potentially improving outcomes and curtailing
unnecessary toxicities. Initial changes in intratumoral cellular and vascular heterogeneity
after treatment could serve as early indicators of treatment response and allow for guidance and optimization of treatment plans for
improved patient outcome. Habitat imaging1
is an emerging approach in oncology to
characterize intratumoral heterogeneity through high-dimensional analysis of
multimodal MRI data. We investigate multiparametric analysis of vascular and cellular characteristics
derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and diffusion-weighted MRI
(DW-MRI) to identify discrete tumor habitats of response in breast cancer patients
receiving NAT.Methods
DW- and DCE-MRI Acquisition
Women with stage II/III
triple negative breast cancer (N=7) were scanned using 3T Siemens Skyra
equipped with 8- or 16- channel receive double breast coil (Sentinelle,
Invivo), at four time points during the course of NAT: prior to treatment (t1), following one round of
therapy (t2), midpoint
prior to altering therapeutic regimens (t3),
and following one cycle of new therapeutic regimens (t4). Pathological complete response
(pCR) and non-pCR was determined at the time of surgery. DW-MRI was
acquired with an echo-planar,
monopolar spin echo sequence with a matrix size of 128 × 128, FOV of 256 × 256
mm, TR/TE = 3000/52 ms, b-values
= 200 and 800 s/mm2, and a GRAPPA acceleration factor of 2. DCE-MRI
data was collected with a matrix size of 192 × 192, FOV of 256 × 256 mm, TR/TE
= 7.02/4.6 ms, α = 6º, and a GRAPPA acceleration factor of 2, allowing each 10-slice
volume to be collected every 7.27 s for 8 minutes. After acquisition of the
first minute of dynamic scans, a catheter placed within an antecubital vein delivered
10 mL of Gadavist (Bayer, Whippany, NJ) at 2 mL/sec via power injector.
DW- and DCE-MRI Processing and Identifying Tumor
Habitats
DW-MRI data was
interpolated to DCE-MRI spatial resolution and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were quantified for every
voxel. Four semi-quantitative parameters were calculated from DCE-MRI data for
each voxel: percent enhancement (PE),
signal enhancement ratio (SER),
wash-in slope (WIS), and wash-out
slope (WOS). A fuzzy c-means
algorithm was used to automatically segment tumor regions-of-interest (ROIs)
using background subtracted DCE-MRI data.2 The ADC, PE, SER, WIS
and WOS maps were then pooled
together across patient scans to identify distinct tumor habitats, using hierarchical
clustering (non-spatial) of tumor voxel data.
Spatial
Analysis of Intratumoral Heterogeneity
For each patient visit, the
identified habitats were mapped back into the spatial domain and a neighborhood
analysis was performed3 to quantify the size of individual
habitats and borders between habitats and surrounding parenchyma. The habitat
and border sizes were then normalized by total tumor volume. Normalized values
were averaged across patient groups (pCR and non-pCR) and statistical differences
between pCR and non-pCR patients across visits was assessed using a two-sample
t-test.
Results
The dendrogram resulting from hierarchical
clustering of MRI data (Figure 1) was cut, based on dendrogram height, to yield
four distinct tumor subregions: high vascular perfusion-high cellularity
(HV-HC), medium vascular perfusion- medium cellularity (MV-MC), low vascular
perfusion-high cellularity (LV-HC), and low vascular perfusion-low cellularity
(LV-LC). No statistically significant differences were observed in habitat
sizes or border sizes at baseline (t1) between pCR and non-pCR
patients (p>0.05). After one round of therapy at t2, a significant decrease in the size of parenchyma and
HV-HC borders was observed in pCR patients compared to non-pCR patients
(p=0.03), a trend which was also observed at t3 (p=0.01). Additionally, a significant increase in the
size of LV-LC habitats was observed at t2
in pCR patients compared to non-pCR patient (p<0.01) a difference which
continued at t3 (p=0.05). Discussion & Conclusion
These preliminary results demonstrate that
habitat imaging analysis of DW- and DCE-MRI data can yield tumor subregions
that are indicative of therapeutic response early in the course of NAT. After
one round of therapy, patients with pCR demonstrated decreases
in identified high
vascular perfusion, high cellularity habitats
adjacent to breast parenchyma, i.e. at the edges of the tumor, as well as
increases in the size of low
vascular perfusion, low cellularity
habitats. These
characterizations of intratumoral heterogeneity can potentially be used to
predict treatment response and guide therapy for patients with breast cancer. Future work will involve inter-visit registration of patient data to
identify longitudinal changes in tumor spatial composition in response to
therapy and improve models of tumor growth and evolution.Acknowledgements
CPRIT
RR160005, NCI U01CA174706, U01CA142565, ACS RSG-18-006-01-CCE, and T32EB007507.
The authors thank Stephanie
L. Barnes for contributions to image
processing software used in this research.References
1. Jardim-Perassi,
B. V., Martinez, G. & Gillies, R. Habitat imaging of tumor evolution by
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). in Radiomics and Radiogenomics (eds.
Li, R., Xing, L., Napel, S. & Rubin, D. L.) 115–120 (Chapman and Hall/CRC,
2019). doi:10.1201/9781351208277-7.
2. Chen, W., Giger, M. L. & Bick, U. A
Fuzzy C-Means (FCM)-Based Approach for Computerized Segmentation of Breast
Lesions in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Images1. Acad. Radiol. 13,
63–72 (2006).
3. Wu, J. et al. Intratumoral
Spatial Heterogeneity at Perfusion MR Imaging Predicts Recurrence-free Survival
in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Radiology
172462 (2018) doi:10.1148/radiol.2018172462.