Hodgkin lymphoma and imaging in the era of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy
The assessment of treatment response is crucial for patient management since it guides further treatment or surveillance program. For the purpose of response evaluation in Hodgkin Lymphoma patients, contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) and fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)–positron emission tomography (PET) were demonstrated to be the most reliable imaging modalities. Response criteria based on tumor size variations on CT and/or modification of tumor glycolytic metabolism on FDG PET have been designed for the assessment of response to chemotherapy and targeted molecular agents. The recent introduction of biological agents with immunological activity revealed the need for criteria revision and for novel biomarkers. The treatment response assessment using the standard criteria for defining anatomical or metabolic remission has been shown to be poorly fit for the immune checkpoint inhibitors since they may determine the “tumor flares”, a phenomenon that has not the same prognostic implications as progressive disease. Accordingly, the response evaluation criteria have been reviewed introducing as main novelty the concept of “pseudo-progression”. Furthermore, PD-1 blockade is not effective in all patients, and delayed or mixed tumor regression can be seen. Therefore, some biomarkers including the detection of PD-L1 on tumor cells, the identification of specific genetic signatures, the longitudinal track of the circulating cell-free DNA, and the imaged-derived parameters have been evaluated to predict response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. The present paper reports the available evidence on the role of imaging in patients with HL and future directions for the investigations in the field, with the special focus on the treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
KeywordsHodgkin lymphoma Nivolumab Pembrolizumab Anti-PD-1 PET/CT CT Biomarkers Response evaluation
We thank Prof. Carlo Stella who referred, treated and managed the patients, and fruitfully collaborated with the authors.
MK and MS: Literature search and review, manuscript writing; AC: Manuscript writing and editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
A. Chiti received speaker honoraria from General Electric, Blue Earth Diagnostics and Sirtex Medical System, acted as scientific advisor for Blue Earth Diagnostics and Advanced Accelerator Applications, and benefited from an unconditional grant from Sanofi to Humanitas University. All honoraria and grants are outside the scope of the submitted work. All other authors have no conflicts of interest.
Research involving human participants
- 7.Younes A, Santoro A, Shipp M et al (2016) Nivolumab for classical Hodgkin’s lymphoma after failure of both autologous stem-cell transplantation and brentuximab vedotin: a multicentre, multicohort, single-arm phase II trial. Lancet Oncol 17:1283–1294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30167-X CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 10.Moskowitz CH, Zinzani PL, Fanale MA et al (2016) Pembrolizumab in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma: primary end point analysis of the phase II keynote-087 study. Blood 128:1107Google Scholar
- 14.Benjamini O, Lavie D, Dann EJ et al (2016) Real-life experience of nivolumab in heavily pretreated relapsed and refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood 128:3008Google Scholar
- 15.Armand P, Engert A, Younes A et al (2018) Nivolumab for relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation: extended follow-up of the multicohort single-arm phase II checkmate 205 trial. J Clin Oncol 36:1428–1439. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.76.0793 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Clinicaltrials.gov. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=Lymphoma+AND+%22Hodgkin+Lymphoma%22&intr=Nivolumab&recrs=a&recrs=f&recrs=d&age_v=&gndr=&type=&rslt=&Search=Apply. Accessed 1 Aug 2018
- 31.Barrington SF, Mikhaeel NG, Kostakoglu L et al (2014) Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the international conference on malignant lymphomas imaging working group. J Clin Oncol 32:3048–3058. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.53.5229 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 38.Cheson BD, Ansell S, Schwartz L et al (2016) Perspectives refinement of the lugano classification lymphoma response criteria in the era of immunomodulatory therapy. Blood 128:2489–2497. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2016-05-718528.BLOOD CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 48.Mukherji D, Jabbour MN, Saroufim M et al (2016) Programmed death-ligand 1 expression in muscle-invasive bladder cancer cystectomy specimens and lymph node metastasis: a reliable treatment selection biomarker? Clin Genitourin Cancer 14:183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2015.12.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 50.Vandenberghe P, Wlodarska I, Tousseyn T et al (2015) Non-invasive detection of genomic imbalances in hodgkin/reed-sternberg cells in early and advanced stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma by sequencing of circulating cell-free DNA: a technical proof-of-principle study. Lancet Haematol 2:e55–e65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3026(14)00039-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 53.Dercle L, Seban R-D, Lazarovici J et al (2018) 18F-FDG PET and CT scans detect new imaging patterns of response and progression in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma treated by anti-programmed death 1 immune checkpoint inhibitor. J Nucl Med 59:15–24. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.193011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 56.Ganeshan B, Miles KA, Babikir S et al (2017) CT-based texture analysis potentially provides prognostic information complementary to interim FDG PET for patients with Hodgkin’s and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. Eur Radiol 27:1012–1020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4470-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar