response evaluation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gist) haesun choi, m.d. diagnostic imaging...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
(GIST)
Haesun Choi, M.D.Diagnostic Imaging
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
![Page 2: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor(GIST)
![Page 3: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Imatinib mesylate
Tyrosine kinase receptor blocker
+
Kinasedomains
“KIT” receptor
Chris Corless, M.D.
![Page 4: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
““Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic
Resonance Imaging (MRI) are the best currentlyResonance Imaging (MRI) are the best currently
available and most reproducible methods for available and most reproducible methods for
measuring the target lesions …”measuring the target lesions …”
Thessasse et al. JNCI 92(3); 205, 2000
![Page 5: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose
Positron Emission Tomography (FDG PET)
![Page 6: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
8/9/02 10/28/02
![Page 7: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Pre-Treatment Pre-Treatment
![Page 8: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Computed Tomography
(CT)
![Page 9: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Gastric GIST Metastatic GIST
![Page 10: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Small bowel GIST Metastatic GIST
![Page 11: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
6/01HU 633.3 cm
8/01HU 382.3 cm
10/01HU 321.9 cm
![Page 12: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
2 Months PostPre-Treatment
![Page 13: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
5 Days PostPre-Treatment
![Page 14: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Pre-Treatment 2 Months Post
43 HU 30 HU
![Page 15: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Methods and Materials (I)
• Total patients = 36 CT* and PET* = 29
*within a week of each other
• Total lesions = 173
Liver: 116
Peritoneum: 52
Pleura: 5
• CT vs. PETCT vs. PET
PET: EORTC1999PET: EORTC1999
Tumor size Tumor size (cm)(cm)
Tumor density Tumor density (HU)(HU)
““Overall Overall tumor tumor status status (OTS)”(OTS)”
![Page 16: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Subjective Tumor Response Evaluation: OTS
Pre-Treatment
tumor vessels
solid tumor
nodules
tumor density
Size +
![Page 17: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
2 Months PostPre-Treatment
![Page 18: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Pre-treatment
8 Wks Post-treatment
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
20
40
60
80
100
Size Mean HU
0
2
4
6
8
10
Mean SUVmax
P = 0.0025, t-test P<0.0025, t-test
P = 0.0025, t-test
Objective Tumor Response Evaluation
![Page 19: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Size vs. SUV
No. Patients
by Changes in SUVmax**
No. of Patients by Changes in Size*Total
No. of
PatientsPD SD PR CR
Grade 1 0 2 0 0 2
Grade 2 1 5 0 0 6
Grade 3 0 1 0 0 1
Grade 4 1 15 4 0 20
Note. - The data were analyzed for the 29 patients who underwent both CT and FDG PET. * Based on RECIST ** Based on modified EORTC 1999 criteria
![Page 20: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Methods and Data Analysis (II)
• Total patients = 40
CT and PET
• “Good Response”:Decrease in SUVmax
>70% <2.5
• Good Response: 33 (83%)– 30 (75%): PET CR
– 3 (8%): 70 - 99% decrease, decrease to a value <2.5
• Poor Response:7 (17%)– 5 (12%): stable
– 2 (5%): increased SUVmax
(Van den Abbeele AD, et al, ASCO 2002)
![Page 21: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Changes in Size and HU on CT vs. Tumor Response on FDG PET
Tumor response by PET
Patients with
10% decrease in size
(%)
Patients with
15% decrease in HU (%)
10% decrease in size or 15%
decrease in HU (%)
Good
(n=33)31 (94) 27 (82) 32 (97)
Poor
(n=7)0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
n – number of patients
Total number of patients = 40
![Page 22: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Modified CT Criteria
+++ ++ ++ ++ ++++++++++ +++++++++++++++
+
++
++
302724211815129630
1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0
+++ ++ ++ ++ +++++++++++++++++++++++
+
++
++ +
302724211815129630
1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0
Non-responderResponder Responder
P = 0.03P = 0.03
PET response:
SUV < 2.5, 70%
CT response:
HU -15%, Size -10%
Months Months
Time to Progression by PET and modified CT criteria
Non-responder
![Page 23: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
+ + + +++ + ++++++ +++ +
++++++ +++
++++ +++++++++++ +++
++++++ +
++ + +++ + + + + + ++ +++ ++++++++++ ++++ +++++++ + +++++++ ++
Months
Time to Progression by RECIST
302724211815129630
1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0 Nonresponders n=54 Responders n=44
P = 0.1
Response Rate 45%
Time to Progression: RECISTN=98
![Page 24: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
+ + ++++ +++++ ++ + ++++++++++++++ + +++++++++++++++++++++ ++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++
+
+
+++
+
+
++
+ +
+ + +++ +
Months
Time to Progression by Our Criteria
302724211815129630
1
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0
Nonresponders n=17Responders n=81
P = 0.0002
Response Rate 83%
Time to Progression: Modified CTN=98
![Page 25: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Surveillance
![Page 26: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Progression
• Increase in tumor size
• Appearance of a new lesion at the site of primary tumor
• Appearance metastatic lesions
![Page 27: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Pre-Treatment2 Months Post
8 Months Post
11 Months Post
![Page 28: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
10 Months Post 17 Months Post 21 Months Post
27 Months Post
![Page 29: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Progression in GIST
• “Increase in tumor size”
• Appearance of a new lesion at the site of primary tumor
• Appearance metastatic lesions
• ““Appearance of new intra-tumoral nodulesAppearance of new intra-tumoral nodules””
![Page 30: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
We do need FDG PET.
![Page 31: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Pre-Treatment 2 Months Post
43 HU 30 HU
![Page 32: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
• RECIST underestimates the tumor response.
• Subjective evaluation using changes in tumor nodules, density, tumor vessels, in addition to change in size is the best criteria on CT and is reproducible.
• CT density alone can be a good indicator in early, quantitative tumor response evaluation.
Conclusions
![Page 33: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Conclusions
• Objective evaluation using a combination of tumor density (15% change) and modified tumor size criteria (10% change) is promising in early tumor response evaluation and has a prognostic value.
• FDG PET should be performed whenever the CT findings are inconclusive or inconsistent with the clinical presentation.
![Page 34: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
It's Time To Re-visit Tumor Response Criteria !!
![Page 35: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Acknowledgements
• Division of Diagnostic Imaging:
Chusilp Charnsangavej, M.D. Silvana C. Faria, M.D.Eric P. Tamm, M.D. Evelyn M. Loyer, M.D.Kazama Toshiki, M.D.
• Division of Nuclear Medicine:
Donald A. Podoloff, M.D.Homer A. Macapinlac, M.D.
• Department of Sarcoma Medical Oncology:
Robert S. Benjamin, M.D.
Sarcoma Center Team
• Department of Biostatistics:
Marcella M. Johnson, M.S.
![Page 36: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
![Page 37: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
![Page 38: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Data Analysis: CT
Variables Response Analysis
Size (cm) RECIST* PD, SD, PR, CR
Density (HU) Grade 1-4
(median:13% )
G1 -12% (worse)
G2 -11% - 11%
G3 12- 31%
G4 32% (best)
OTR**
(size, density,
vessels, nodules)
Grade 1-4 G1 worse, G2 stable
G3 better, G4 best
**OTR – overall tumor response *JNCI 92(3); 205, 2000
![Page 39: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
OTS vs. SUV
No. Patients
by Change in SUVmax
No. Patients by Changes in OTS Total
No. of
PatientsGrade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4
Grade 1 0 2 0 0 2
Grade 2 6 0 0 0 6
Grade 3 0 0 1 0 1
Grade 4 0 1 4 15 20
Note. - The data were analyzed for the 29 patients who underwent both CT and FDG PET.
P = 0.0001*, Chi-Square Test
*Statistically significant.
![Page 40: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
HU vs. SUV
No. Patients
by Change in SUVmax
No. Patients by Changes in HU Total
No. of
PatientsGrade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4
Grade 1 0 1 1 0 2
Grade 2 1 4 1 0 6
Grade 3 0 1 0 0 1
Grade 4 2 4 4 10 20
Note. - The data were analyzed for the 29 patients who underwent both CT and FDG PET.
P = 0.3088, Chi-Square Test
![Page 41: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
ReproducibilityN = 35
![Page 42: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Methods and Materials (II)
• Two radiologists who were not participated in initial analysis of CT images
• Overall Tumor Status (OTS)
• The results of two radiologists were compared with each other.
![Page 43: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
0
20
40
60
80
100Size
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
Pre-treatment
8 Wks Post-treatment
Mean SUVmax
Mean HUP < 0.0001, t-test P < 0.0001, t-test
P < 0.0001, t-test
![Page 44: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Reader A vs. B
Reader A Reader B
Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4
Grade 1 0 0 0 0
Grade 2 1 2 2 0
Grade 3 0 0 11 0
Grade 4 0 0 12 7
P* = 0.0002, Chi-Square Test, rtau** = 0.5782
*Statistically significant. ** Kendall’s Tau correlation.
Note – Grades are based on OTR at 8 wks post-treatment.
![Page 45: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
OTS vs. SUV
No. Patients
by Change in SUVmax
No. Patients by Changes in OTS Total
No. of
PatientsGrade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4
Grade 1 0 2 0 0 2
Grade 2 0 0 1 0 1
Grade 3 0 1 0 0 1
Grade 4 0 1 10 20 31
Note. - The data were analyzed for the 35 patients who underwent both CT and FDG PET.
P = 0.0001*, Chi-Square Test
*Statistically significant.
![Page 46: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
EatoEaton 411286
Pre-Treatment
24 Months Post
2 Months Post
27 Months Post
![Page 47: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Discrepancy(?): HU vs. SUVmax
• Development of intratumoral hemorrhage
• Definition of ROI
• EORTC guideline
![Page 48: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
528671
![Page 49: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
“KIT” Receptor
Tyrosine Kinase Receptor Blocker
+
![Page 50: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
• RECIST underestimates the tumor response in GIST.
• Subjective evaluation using changes in tumor nodules, density, tumor vessels, in addition to change in size is the best criteria on CT and is reproducible.
Conclusions
![Page 51: Response Evaluation of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Haesun Choi, M.D. Diagnostic Imaging The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston,](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062421/56649dbc5503460f94aae09b/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Conclusions
• Objective evaluation using a combination of tumor density (15% change) and modified tumor size criteria (10% change) is promising in early tumor response evaluation and has a prognostic value.
• FDG PET should be performed whenever the CT findings are inconclusive or inconsistent with the clinical presentation.