Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma

Naveen M. Kulkarni, Daniella F. Pinho, Srikala Narayanan, Avinash R. Kambadakone, Jeremy S. Abramson, Dushyant V. Sahani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to examine the role of different imaging biomarkers, focusing in particular on the use of updated CT and PET response criteria for the assessment of oncologic treatment effectiveness in patients with lymphoma but also discussing other potential functional imaging methods and their limitations. CONCLUSION. Lymph nodes are commonly involved by metastatic solid tumors as well as by lymphoma. Evolving changes in cancer therapy for lymphoma and metastases have led to improved clinical outcomes. Imaging is a recognized surrogate endpoint that uses established criteria based on changes in tumor bulk to monitor the effects of treatment. With the introduction of targeted therapies and novel antiangiogenic drugs, the oncologic expectations from imaging assessment are changing to move beyond simple morphologic methods. Molecular and functional imaging methods (e.g., PET, perfusion, DWI, and dual-energy CT) are therefore being investigated as imaging biomarkers of response and prognosis. The role of these advanced imaging biomarkers extends beyond measuring tumor burden and therefore might offer insight into early predictors of therapeutic response. Despite the potential benefits of these exciting imaging biomarkers, several challenges currently exist.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)18-31
Number of pages14
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume208
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Lymphoma
Biomarkers
Neoplasms
Molecular Imaging
Therapeutics
Tumor Burden
Perfusion
Lymph Nodes
Neoplasm Metastasis
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • DWI
  • International Working Group criteria
  • Lugano criteria
  • Lymphoma
  • PET

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Kulkarni, N. M., Pinho, D. F., Narayanan, S., Kambadakone, A. R., Abramson, J. S., & Sahani, D. V. (2017). Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma. American Journal of Roentgenology, 208(1), 18-31. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16180

Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma. / Kulkarni, Naveen M.; Pinho, Daniella F.; Narayanan, Srikala; Kambadakone, Avinash R.; Abramson, Jeremy S.; Sahani, Dushyant V.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 208, No. 1, 01.01.2017, p. 18-31.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kulkarni, NM, Pinho, DF, Narayanan, S, Kambadakone, AR, Abramson, JS & Sahani, DV 2017, 'Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma', American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 208, no. 1, pp. 18-31. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16180
Kulkarni NM, Pinho DF, Narayanan S, Kambadakone AR, Abramson JS, Sahani DV. Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2017 Jan 1;208(1):18-31. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16180
Kulkarni, Naveen M. ; Pinho, Daniella F. ; Narayanan, Srikala ; Kambadakone, Avinash R. ; Abramson, Jeremy S. ; Sahani, Dushyant V. / Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma. In: American Journal of Roentgenology. 2017 ; Vol. 208, No. 1. pp. 18-31.
@article{41c8cd9b0d5d47ae96e728411b2ac300,
title = "Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to examine the role of different imaging biomarkers, focusing in particular on the use of updated CT and PET response criteria for the assessment of oncologic treatment effectiveness in patients with lymphoma but also discussing other potential functional imaging methods and their limitations. CONCLUSION. Lymph nodes are commonly involved by metastatic solid tumors as well as by lymphoma. Evolving changes in cancer therapy for lymphoma and metastases have led to improved clinical outcomes. Imaging is a recognized surrogate endpoint that uses established criteria based on changes in tumor bulk to monitor the effects of treatment. With the introduction of targeted therapies and novel antiangiogenic drugs, the oncologic expectations from imaging assessment are changing to move beyond simple morphologic methods. Molecular and functional imaging methods (e.g., PET, perfusion, DWI, and dual-energy CT) are therefore being investigated as imaging biomarkers of response and prognosis. The role of these advanced imaging biomarkers extends beyond measuring tumor burden and therefore might offer insight into early predictors of therapeutic response. Despite the potential benefits of these exciting imaging biomarkers, several challenges currently exist.",
keywords = "DWI, International Working Group criteria, Lugano criteria, Lymphoma, PET",
author = "Kulkarni, {Naveen M.} and Pinho, {Daniella F.} and Srikala Narayanan and Kambadakone, {Avinash R.} and Abramson, {Jeremy S.} and Sahani, {Dushyant V.}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2214/AJR.16.16180",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "208",
pages = "18--31",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Imaging for oncologic response assessment in lymphoma

AU - Kulkarni, Naveen M.

AU - Pinho, Daniella F.

AU - Narayanan, Srikala

AU - Kambadakone, Avinash R.

AU - Abramson, Jeremy S.

AU - Sahani, Dushyant V.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to examine the role of different imaging biomarkers, focusing in particular on the use of updated CT and PET response criteria for the assessment of oncologic treatment effectiveness in patients with lymphoma but also discussing other potential functional imaging methods and their limitations. CONCLUSION. Lymph nodes are commonly involved by metastatic solid tumors as well as by lymphoma. Evolving changes in cancer therapy for lymphoma and metastases have led to improved clinical outcomes. Imaging is a recognized surrogate endpoint that uses established criteria based on changes in tumor bulk to monitor the effects of treatment. With the introduction of targeted therapies and novel antiangiogenic drugs, the oncologic expectations from imaging assessment are changing to move beyond simple morphologic methods. Molecular and functional imaging methods (e.g., PET, perfusion, DWI, and dual-energy CT) are therefore being investigated as imaging biomarkers of response and prognosis. The role of these advanced imaging biomarkers extends beyond measuring tumor burden and therefore might offer insight into early predictors of therapeutic response. Despite the potential benefits of these exciting imaging biomarkers, several challenges currently exist.

AB - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to examine the role of different imaging biomarkers, focusing in particular on the use of updated CT and PET response criteria for the assessment of oncologic treatment effectiveness in patients with lymphoma but also discussing other potential functional imaging methods and their limitations. CONCLUSION. Lymph nodes are commonly involved by metastatic solid tumors as well as by lymphoma. Evolving changes in cancer therapy for lymphoma and metastases have led to improved clinical outcomes. Imaging is a recognized surrogate endpoint that uses established criteria based on changes in tumor bulk to monitor the effects of treatment. With the introduction of targeted therapies and novel antiangiogenic drugs, the oncologic expectations from imaging assessment are changing to move beyond simple morphologic methods. Molecular and functional imaging methods (e.g., PET, perfusion, DWI, and dual-energy CT) are therefore being investigated as imaging biomarkers of response and prognosis. The role of these advanced imaging biomarkers extends beyond measuring tumor burden and therefore might offer insight into early predictors of therapeutic response. Despite the potential benefits of these exciting imaging biomarkers, several challenges currently exist.

KW - DWI

KW - International Working Group criteria

KW - Lugano criteria

KW - Lymphoma

KW - PET

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007332280&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85007332280&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2214/AJR.16.16180

DO - 10.2214/AJR.16.16180

M3 - Article

C2 - 27786547

AN - SCOPUS:85007332280

VL - 208

SP - 18

EP - 31

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 1

ER -