The value of dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) in monitoring treatment effect of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online April 24, 2021
The value of dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) in monitoring treatment effect of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)
To evaluate the feasibility of dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) in predicting treatment response of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) lesions.
PATIENTS AND METHODS:
In this prospective study, 10 patients with pathologically confirmed LAPC lesions (7 men, 3 women; average age, 61.13±5.80 years) were prospectively enrolled. All patients received HIFU treatment with peak intensity at 12000 W/cm2. Contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) was performed with an ACUSON Oxana 2 ultrasound equipment and a 6 C-1 transducer (1–6 Hz). A dose of 2.4 ml SonoVue was injected for each examination. Time intensity curves (TICs) were generated and quantitative analyses were performed by SonoLiver software. B mode ultrasound (BMUS) features, CEUS enhancement patterns, TICs, CEUS quantitative parameters and serum carcinoma antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) levels were compared before and 4 weeks after HIFU treatment. Statistical analyses were performed with SPSS Version 20.0 and GraphPad Prism 5.
RESULTS:
While comparing before and after HIFU, no significant difference was obtained on mean size of lesion, BMUS or CEUS features. After HIFU treatment, TICs showed decreased and delayed enhancement. Among all CEUS quantitative parameters, significant decrease could be found in maximum intensity (MI) (60.66±23.95% vs 41.31±26.74%) and mean transit time (mTT) (76.66±47.61 s vs 38.42±28.35 s). CA19-9 level decreased significantly after HIFU (2747.92±4237.41 U/ml vs 715.08±1773.90 U/ml) (P = 0.05).
CONCLUSION:
DCE-US combining with quantitative analysis might be a useful imaging method for early treatment response evaluation of HIFU in LAPC lesions.
XieJ, LiuH, LiuWS, LiJW. Quantitative shear wave elastography for noninvasive assessment of solid pancreatic masses. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2020;74(2):179–87.
4.
PollomEL, KoongAC, KoAH. Treatment Approaches to Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2015;29(4):741–59.
5.
IzadifarZ, IzadifarZ, ChapmanD, BabynP. An Introduction to High Intensity Focused Ultrasound Systematic Review on Principles, Devices and Clinical Applications. 2020.
6.
MarinovaM, HuxoldHC, HenselerJ, MückeM, ConradR, RolkeR, et al. Clinical Effectiveness and Potential Survival Benefit of US-Guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Therapy in Patients with Advanced-Stage Pancreatic Cancer. Ultraschall Med. 2019;40(5):625–37.
7.
AnzideiM, MarincolaBC, BezziM, BrachettiG, NudoF, CortesiE, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: preliminary experience for pain palliation and local tumor control. Invest Radiol. 2014;49(12):759–65.
8.
WuF, WangZB, ZhuH, ChenWZ, ZouJZ, BaiJ, et al. Feasibility of US-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: initial experience. Radiology. 2005;236(3):1034–40.
9.
MaB, LiuX, YuZ. The effect of high intensity focused ultrasound on the treatment of liver cancer and patients’ immunity. Cancer Biomark. 2019;24(1):85–90.
10.
WangG, ZhouD. Preoperative ultrasound ablation for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A report of 30 cases. Ultrason Sonochem. 2015;27:694–702.
11.
Vidal-JoveJ, PerichE, Del CastilloMA. Ultrasound Guided High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for malignant tumors: The Spanish experience of survival advantage in stage III and IV pancreatic cancer. Ultrason Sonochem. 2015;27:703–6.
12.
EisenhauerEA, TherasseP, BogaertsJ, SchwartzLH, SargentD, FordR, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47.
13.
DalahE, TaiA, OshimaK, HallWA, EricksonB, LiXA. PET-based Treatment Response Assessment for Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: An Exploratory Study. Transl Oncol. 2018;11(5):1104–9.
14.
TanakaH, KamataK, TakenakaM, YoshikawaT, IshikawaR, OkamotoA, et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography for evaluating the response to chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Dig Liver Dis. 2019;51(8):1130–4.
15.
KimSI, ShinJY, ParkJS, JeongS, JeonYS, ChoiMH, et al. Vascular enhancement pattern of mass in computed tomography may predict chemo-responsiveness in advanced pancreatic cancer. Pancreatology. 2017;17(1):103–8.
16.
KimH, MorganDE, SchexnailderP, NavariRM, WilliamsGR, Bart RoseJ, et al. Accurate Therapeutic Response Assessment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Using Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging With a Point-of-Care Perfusion Phantom: A Pilot Study. Invest Radiol. 2019;54(1):16–22.
17.
SidhuPS, CantisaniV, DietrichCF, GiljaOH, SaftoiuA, BartelsE, et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in Non-Hepatic Applications: Update (Long Version). Ultraschall Med. 2018;39(2):e2–e44.
18.
da SilvaNPB, BeyerLP, HottenrottMC, HacklC, SchlittHJ, StroszczynskiC, et al. Efficiency of contrast enhanced ultrasound for immediate assessment of ablation status after intraoperative radiofrequency ablation of hepatic malignancies. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation. 2017;66(4):357–68.
19.
WiesingerI, WiggermannP, ZausigN, BeyerLP, SalzbergerB, StroszczynskiC, et al. Percutaneous Treatment of Malignant Liver Lesions: Evaluation of Success Using Contrast- Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and Perfusion Software. Ultraschall Med. 2018;39(4):440–7.
20.
WildnerD, SchellhaasB, StrackD, GoertzRS, PfeiferL, FiesslerC, et al. Differentiation of malignant liver tumors by software-based perfusion quantification with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (DCEUS). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2019;71(1):39–51.
21.
ZhangQ, WuL, YangD, QiuY, YuL, DongY, et al. Clinical application of dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound in monitoring the treatment response of chemoradiotherapy of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2020.
22.
DongY, WangWP, LinP, FanP, MaoF. Assessment of renal perfusion with contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Preliminary results in early diabetic nephropathies. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2016;62(3):229–38.
23.
DietrichCF, AverkiouMA, CorreasJM, LassauN, LeenE, PiscagliaF. An EFSUMB introduction into Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (DCE-US) for quantification of tumour perfusion. Ultraschall Med. 2012;33(4):344–51.
24.
StrunkHM, HenselerJ, RauchM, MückeM, KukukG, CuhlsH, et al. Clinical Use of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) for Tumor and Pain Reduction in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. Rofo. 2016;188(7):662–70.
25.
ScopellitiF, PeaA, ConigliaroR, ButturiniG, FrigerioI, RegiP, et al. Technique, safety, and feasibility of EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation in unresectable pancreatic cancer. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(9):4022–8.
26.
SchefferHJ, NielsenK, de JongMC, van TilborgAA, VieveenJM, BouwmanAR, et al. Irreversible electroporation for nonthermal tumor ablation in the clinical setting: a systematic review of safety and efficacy. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25(7):997–1011; quiz
27.
DollingerM, Muller-WilleR, ZemanF, HaimerlM, NiessenC, BeyerLP, et al. Irreversible Electroporation of Malignant Hepatic Tumors–Alterations in Venous Structures at Subacute Follow-Up and Evolution at Mid-Term Follow-Up. PLoS One. 2015;10(8):e0135773.
28.
SheWH, CheungTT, JenkinsCR, IrwinMG. Clinical applications of high-intensity focused ultrasound. Hong Kong Med J. 2016;22(4):382–92.
29.
WuF, ChenWZ, BaiJ, ZouJZ, WangZL, ZhuH, et al. Pathological changes in human malignant carcinoma treated with high-intensity focused ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001;27(8):1099–106.
30.
PiscagliaF, NolsoeC, DietrichCF, CosgroveDO, GiljaOH, Bachmann NielsenM, et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Practice of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med. 2012;33(1):33–59.
31.
MaconiG, NylundK, RipollesT, CalabreseE, DirksK, DietrichCF, et al. EFSUMB Recommendations and Clinical Guidelines for Intestinal Ultrasound (GIUS) in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Ultraschall Med. 2018;39(3):304–17.
32.
FrampasE, LassauN, ZappaM, VulliermeMP, KoscielnyS, VilgrainV. Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: early evaluation of response to targeted therapy and prognostic value of Perfusion CT and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced-Ultrasound. Preliminary results. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(5):e205–11.
33.
WilliamsR, HudsonJM, LloydBA, SureshkumarAR, LueckG, MilotL, et al. Dynamic microbubble contrast-enhanced US to measure tumor response to targeted therapy: a proposed clinical protocol with results from renal cell carcinoma patients receiving antiangiogenic therapy. Radiology. 2011;260(2):581–90.
34.
TianH, WangQ. Quantitative analysis of microcirculation blood perfusion in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma before and after transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation using contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Eur J Cancer. 2016;68:82–9.
35.
DietrichCF, NolsoeCP, BarrRG, BerzigottiA, BurnsPN, CantisaniV, et al. Guidelines and Good Clinical Practice Recommendations for Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Liver-Update 2020 WFUMB in Cooperation with EFSUMB, AFSUMB, AIUM, and FLAUS. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2020;46(10):2579–604.
36.
WiesingerI, KroissE, ZausigN, HornungM, ZemanF, StroszczynskiC, et al. Analysis of arterial dynamic micro-vascularization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in thyroid lesions using external perfusion software: First results. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2016;64(4):747–55.
37.
WiesingerI, BeyerLP, ZausigN, VerlohN, WiggermannP, StroszczynskiC, et al. Evaluation of integrated color-coded perfusion analysis for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) after percutaneous interventions for malignant liver lesions: First results. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation. 2018;69(1-2):59–67.
