Imaging Intratumor Heterogeneity: Role in Therapy Response, Resistance, and Clinical Outcome James P.B
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Published OnlineFirst November 24, 2014; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0990 Review Clinical Cancer Research Imaging Intratumor Heterogeneity: Role in Therapy Response, Resistance, and Clinical Outcome James P.B. O'Connor1,2, Chris J. Rose1, John C. Waterton1,3, Richard A.D. Carano4, Geoff J.M. Parker1, and Alan Jackson1 Abstract Tumors exhibit genomic and phenotypic heterogeneity, than another and can identify subregions with differing biol- which has prognostic significance and may influence response ogy. In this article, we review the image analysis methods to therapy. Imaging can quantify the spatial variation in archi- currently used to quantify spatial heterogeneity within tumors. tecture and function of individual tumors through quantifying We discuss how analysis of intratumor heterogeneity can pro- basic biophysical parameters such as CT density or MRI signal vide benefit over more simple biomarkers such as tumor size relaxation rate; through measurements of blood flow, hypoxia, and average function. We consider how imaging methods can metabolism, cell death, and other phenotypic features; and be integrated with genomic and pathology data, instead of through mapping the spatial distribution of biochemical path- being developed in isolation. Finally, we identify the challenges ways and cell signaling networks using PET, MRI, and other that must be overcome before measurements of intratumoral emerging molecular imaging techniques. These methods can heterogeneity can be used routinely to guide patient care. Clin establish whether one tumor is more or less heterogeneous Cancer Res; 21(2); 1–9. Ó2014 AACR. Introduction extent varies between preclinical cancer models and between patients (12). Allowing for these differences, some common Malignant tumors are biologically complex and exhibit sub- themes emerge. First, intratumor heterogeneity can be dynamic. stantial spatial variation in gene expression, biochemistry, histo- For example, variations in tumor pO fluctuate over minutes to pathology, and macroscopic structure. Cancerous cells not only 2 hours (5, 6). Second, intratumor heterogeneity tends to increase as undergo clonal evolution from a single progenitor cell into more tumors grow (7, 13). Third, established spatial heterogeneity aggressive and therapy-resistant cells, but also exhibit branched frequently indicates poor clinical prognosis (14), in part due to evolution, whereby each tumor develops and preserves multiple resistant subpopulations of cells driving resistance to therapy distinct subclonal populations (1). This genetic heterogeneity (3, 15). Finally, intratumor heterogeneity may increase or decrease (1, 2), combined with spatial variation in environmental stres- following efficacious anticancer therapy (11, 16), depending on sors, leads to regional differences in stromal architecture (3), the imaging test used and the underlying tumor biology (17). oxygen consumption (4, 5), glucose metabolism (4), and growth Imaging depicts spatial heterogeneity in tumors. However, factor expression (6). Consequently, tumor subregions develop, while imaging is central to diagnosis, staging, response assess- each with spatially distinct patterns of blood flow (7, 8), vessel ment, and recurrence detection in routine oncologic practice, permeability (9), cell proliferation (10), cell death (11), and other most clinical radiology and research studies only measure tumor features. size or average parameter values, such as median blood flow (18). Spatial heterogeneity is found between different tumors within In doing so, spatially rich information is discarded. There has been individual patients (intertumor heterogeneity) and within each considerable effort to use more sophisticated analyses to either lesion in an individual (intratumor heterogeneity). Intratumor quantify overall tumor spatial complexity or identify the tumor heterogeneity is near ubiquitous in malignant tumors, but the subregions that may drive disease transformation, progression, and drug resistance (11, 19). 1CRUK-EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester, In this review, we highlight the strengths and weaknesses of University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom. 2Department methods that measure intratumor spatial heterogeneity (Fig. 1 of Radiology, Christie Hospital, Manchester, United Kingdom. 3R&D fi and Table 1). We evaluate evidence that heterogeneity analyses Personalised Healthcare and Biomarkers, AstraZeneca, Maccles eld, fi United Kingdom. 4Biomedical Imaging Department, Genentech, Inc., provide any clinical bene t over simple "average value" measure- South San Francisco, California. ments. We discuss how imaging, genomic, and pathology bio- Note: Supplementary data for this article are available at Clinical Cancer markers of intratumor heterogeneity relate to one another. Final- Research Online (http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/). ly, we identify the hurdles to translating image biomarkers of Corresponding Author: James P.B. O'Connor, University of Manchester, spatial heterogeneity into clinical practice. Stopford Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, United Kingdom. Phone: 44-1614463896; Fax: 44-1612755145; E-mail: james.o'[email protected] Qualitative Assessment of Heterogeneity doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0990 Radiologists use qualitative descriptors to describe adverse Ó2014 American Association for Cancer Research. spatial features and functional heterogeneity on clinical scans. www.aacrjournals.org OF1 Downloaded from clincancerres.aacrjournals.org on September 25, 2021. © 2014 American Association for Cancer Research. Published OnlineFirst November 24, 2014; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0990 O'Connor et al. AB C Clinical radiology Imaging science: current Imaging science: future Size (1D or 2D) Tumor function Intratumoral heterogeneity and complexity 20 Histograms 15 (e.g., mode, skew, 10 Figure 1. kurtosis, nth centile, 5 Quantifying intratumoral standard deviation) 0 heterogeneity: the example liver metastasis from a patient with a colonic primary tumor can be measured in several different ways. A, most clinical assessment of tumors Texture analysis is size based. B, functional imaging (e.g., box counting) methods can measure tumor pathophysiology but tend to derive average parameter values, such as median Ktrans. C, some intratumoral heterogeneity methods quantify overall complexity of a distribution RECIST: 1D DCE-MRI Partitioning (histograms) or spatial arrangement WHO: 2D (e.g., median K trans) (e.g., enhancing fraction) of data (texture analysis). Other methods identify tumor subregions using a priori assumptions (partitioning) or data-driven approaches (multispectral analysis). Multispectral analysis (e.g., size of cluster, change within cluster) © 2014 American Association for Cancer Research For example, when assessing pulmonary nodules on CT (20) and Voxels: Considerations for Quantifying breast lumps on X-ray mammography (21), spiculation implies Heterogeneity greater risk of malignancy compared with well-circumscribed lesions. Indeed, spiculate morphology is part of the BI-RADS Imaging modalities measure biophysical signals in tissues and (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) lexicon that classifies spatially encode these signals to create clinical images or param- breast lesions as "radiologically malignant" (22). eter maps composed of three-dimensional picture elements called Identifying a tumor "hot spot" is also commonplace in cancer voxels. Heterogeneity analyses combine data from many voxels. radiology. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) Several issues arise when interpreting these data. derived from 18F-FDG PET-CT imaging is an established proxy for First, some voxels suffer from partial volume averaging (typ- identifying abnormal glucose metabolism, based on identifying ically at interface with nontumor tissue). Second, there is inev- the one or more voxels with greatest abnormality. Measuring itable compromise between having sufficient numbers of voxels fi SUVmax is simple and reproducible (23, 24) and can be performed to perform the analysis versus suf ciently large voxels to over- on clinical work stations. The presence of abnormal glycolysis in come noise and keep imaging times practical (29). Most methods part of a tumor using SUVmax is used widely to stage and monitor of analysis require hundreds to thousands of voxels for robust response in several malignant tumors (25). In glioma, regional application. Third, many studies of tumor spatial heterogeneity high values of tracer uptake (18F-FDG and 11C-methionine) have have used standard clinical data from protocols dictated by been used to grade tumors using targeted biopsy (26). clinical rather than research needs. In some cases, sections of Perfusion CT and MRI methods use "hot spot" analysis to tumor were omitted when noncontiguous tumor sampling was identify tumor regions with the most abnormal vascular features. used (30), which may confound three-dimensional spatial anal- Specialist neuro-oncology centers use dynamic contrast-enhanced yses (31). Fourth, some calculated voxel values, such as apparent trans MRI (DCE-MRI) or dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI (DSC- diffusion coefficient (ADC), contrast transfer coefficient (K ), MRI) in patients with high-grade glioma (HGG) to map relative and blood flow, are derived from multiple images obtained over cerebral blood volume (rCBV; ref. 27) based on the rationale that time. The estimation errors associated with motion vary for "more vascular" regions correspond to