Quantifying Uncertainty and Robustness in a Biomathematical Model–Based Patient-Specific Response Metric for Glioblastoma

Purpose Glioblastomas, lethal primary brain tumors, are known for their heterogeneity and invasiveness. A growing body of literature has been developed demonstrating the clinical relevance of a biomathematical model, the proliferation-invasion model, of glioblastoma growth. Of interest here is the development of a treatment response metric, days gained (DG). This metric is based on individual tumor kinetics estimated through segmented volumes of hyperintense regions on T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced and T2-weighted magnetic resonance images. This metric was shown to be prognostic of time to progression. Furthermore, it was shown to be more prognostic of outcome than standard response metrics. Although promising, the original article did not account for uncertainty in the calculation of the DG metric, leaving the robustness of this cutoff in question. Methods We harnessed the Bayesian framework to consider the impact of two sources of uncertainty: (1) image acquisition and (2) interobserver error in image segmentation. We first used synthetic data to characterize what nonerror variants are influencing the final uncertainty in the DG metric. We then considered the original patient cohort to investigate clinical patterns of uncertainty and to determine how robust this metric is for predicting time to progression and overall survival. Results Our results indicate that the key clinical variants are the time between pretreatment images and the underlying tumor growth kinetics, matching our observations in the clinical cohort. Finally, we demonstrated that for this cohort, there was a continuous range of cutoffs between 94 and 105 for which the prediction of the time to progression was over 80% reliable. Conclusion Although additional validation must be performed, this work represents a key step in ascertaining the clinical utility of this metric.

Tumor Size and Overall Survival in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer Treated With Chemotherapy and Bevacizumab

Introduction: Ovarian cancer is now recognized as a constellation of distinct subtypes of neoplasia involving the ovary and related structures. As a consequence of this heterogeneity, the analysis of covariates influencing the overall survival is crucial in this disease segment. In this work, an overall survival model incorporating tumor kinetics metrics in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer was developed from the randomized, open label, phase 3 AURELIA trial. Methods: Tumor size data from 361 patients randomly allocated to the bevacizumab + chemotherapy or chemotherapy study arm were collected at baseline and every 8 to 9 weeks until disease progression. Patients continued to be followed for survival after treatment discontinuation. A landmarked Cox proportional hazard survival model was developed to characterize the overall survival distribution. Results: Two sets of factors were found to be influential on survival time: those describing the type and severity of disease (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG], Féderation Internationale de Gynécologie et d’Obstétrique [FIGO] stages, presence of ascites) and those summarizing the key features of the tumor kinetic model (tumor shrinkage at week 8 and tumor size at treatment onset). The treatment group was not required in the final model as the drug effect was accounted for in the tumor kinetics model. Conclusions: This work has identified both ascites and tumor kinetics metrics as being the 2 most influential factors to explain variability in overall survival in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Quantifying Uncertainty and Robustness in a Biomathematical Model Based Patient-Specific Response Metric for Glioblastoma

Glioblastomas, lethal primary brain tumors, are known for their heterogeneity and invasiveness. A growing literature has been developed demonstrating the clinical relevance of a biomathematical model, the Proliferation-Invasion (PI) model, of glioblastoma growth. Of interest here is the development of a treatment response metric, Days Gained (DG). This metric is based on individual tumor kinetics estimated through segmented volumes of hyperintense regions on T1-weighted gadolinium enhanced (T1Gd) and T2-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRIs). This metric was shown to be prognostic of time to progression. Further, it was shown to be more prognostic of outcome than standard response metrics. While promising, the original paper did not account for uncertainty in the calculation of the DG metric leaving the robustness of this cutoff in question. We harness the Bayesian framework to consider the impact of two sources of uncertainty: 1) image acquisition and 2) interobserver error in image segmentation. We first utilize synthetic data to characterize what non-error variants are influencing the final uncertainty in the DG metric. We then consider the original patient cohort to investigate clinical patterns of uncertainty and to determine how robust this metric is for predicting time to progression and overall survival. Our results indicate that the key clinical variants are the time between pre-treatment images and the underlying tumor growth kinetics, matching our observations in the clinical cohort. Finally, we demonstrated that for this cohort there was a continuous range of cutoffs between 94 and 105 for which the prediction of the time to progression and was over 80% reliable. While further validation must be done, this work represents a key step in ascertaining the clinical utility of this metric.