Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Importance of Central Imaging Review in a Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma Trial Using Positron Emission Tomography Response Adapted Radiation Therapy

  • Bradford S. Hoppe
  • , Kathleen M. McCarten
  • , Qinglin Pei
  • , Sandy Kessel
  • , Adina Alazraki
  • , Joyce C. Mhlanga
  • , Hollie A. Lai
  • , Eric Eutsler
  • , David C. Hodgson
  • , Kenneth B. Roberts
  • , Anne Marie Charpentier
  • , Frank G. Keller
  • , Stephan D. Voss
  • , Yue Wu
  • , Steve Y. Cho
  • , Kara M. Kelly
  • , Sharon M. Castellino
  • Mayo Clinic Florida
  • Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Rhode Island
  • University of Florida
  • Emory University
  • Washington University St. Louis
  • Children's Health of Orange County
  • Progressive Physician Associates
  • University of Toronto
  • Yale University
  • Centre Hospitalier de L'Universite de Montreal
  • Children's Healthcare of Atlanta
  • Boston Children's Hospital
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: We investigated the effects of central review of the interim fluorodeoxyglucose−positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) scan response (iPET) assessment on treatment allocation in the risk-based, response-adapted, Children's Oncology Group study AHOD1331 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02166463) for pediatric patients with high-risk Hodgkin lymphoma. Methods and Materials: Per protocol, after 2 cycles of systemic therapy, patients underwent iPET, with visual response assessment by 5-point Deauville score (DS) at their treating institution and a real-time central review, with the latter considered the reference standard. An area of disease with a DS of 1 to 3 was considered a rapid-responding lesion, whereas a DS of 4 to 5 was considered a slow-responding lesion (SRL). Patients with 1 or more SRLs were considered iPET positive, whereas patients with only rapid-responding lesions were considered iPET negative. We conducted a predefined exploratory evaluation of concordance in iPET response assessment between institutional and central reviews of 573 patients. The concordance rate was evaluated using the Cohen κ statistic (κ > 0.80 was considered very good agreement and κ > 0.60-0.80, good agreement). Results: The concordance rate (514 of 573 [89.7%]) had a κ of 0.685 (95% CI, 0.610-0.759), consistent with good agreement. In terms of the direction of discordance, among the 126 patients who were considered iPET positive by institutional review, 38 (30.2%) were categorized as iPET negative by central review, preventing overtreatment with radiation therapy. Conversely, among the 447 patients who were considered iPET negative by institutional review, 21 patients (4.7%) were categorized as iPET positive by the central review and would have been undertreated without radiation therapy. Conclusions: Central review is integral to PET response−adapted clinical trials for children with Hodgkin lymphoma. Continued support of central imaging review and education about DS are needed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1025-1030
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume116
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Importance of Central Imaging Review in a Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma Trial Using Positron Emission Tomography Response Adapted Radiation Therapy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this