Max D. Tanaka

Dr. Max D. Tanaka


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

5Years (2022-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EKErnst Kooreman
Ernst Kooreman
MTMax D. Tanaka
Max D. Tanaka
LBLeon C. ter Beek
Leon C. ter Beek
FPFemke P. Peters
Femke P. Peters
CMCorrie A. M. Marijnen
Corrie A. M. Marijnen
PHPetra J. van Houdt
Petra J. van Houdt
Quantitative MRI has the potential to produce imaging biomarkers for the prediction of early response to radiotherapy treatment. In this pilot study, a potential imaging biomarker, the T1ρ relaxation time, is assessed for this purpose. A T1ρ sequence was implemented on a 1.5 T MR-linac system, a system that combines an MRI with a linear accelerator for radiation treatment. An agar phantom with concentrations of 1–4% w/w was constructed for technical validation of the sequence. Phantom images were assessed in terms of short-term repeatability and signal-to-noise ratio. Twelve rectal cancer patients, who were treated with 5 × 5 Gy, were imaged on each treatment fraction. Individual changes in the T1ρ values of the gross tumor volume (GTV) showed an increase for most patients, although a paired t-test comparing values in the GTV from the first to the last treatment fraction showed no statistically significant difference. The phantom measurements showed excellent short-term repeatability (0.5–1.5 ms), and phantom T1ρ values corresponded to the literature values. T1ρ imaging was implemented successfully on the MR-linac, with a repeatability comparable to diagnostic systems, although clinical benefit in terms of treatment response monitoring remains to be demonstrated.

10 May 2025 in International Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP)
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MTMax D. Tanaka
Max D. Tanaka
BGBengt Glimelius
Bengt Glimelius
GHGeke A.P. Hospers
Geke A.P. Hospers
EKElma Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg
Elma Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg
CMCorrie A.M. Marijnen
Corrie A.M. Marijnen
ACAlice M. Couwenberg
Alice M. Couwenberg

3 August 2023 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MTMax D. Tanaka
Max D. Tanaka
BGBarbara Melissa Geubels
Barbara Melissa Geubels
BGBrechtje A. Grotenhuis
Brechtje A. Grotenhuis
CMCorrie A. M. Marijnen
Corrie A. M. Marijnen
FPFemke P. Peters
Femke P. Peters
ACAlice M. Couwenberg
Alice M. Couwenberg
Pretreatment response prediction is crucial to select those patients with rectal cancer who will benefit from organ preservation strategies following (intensified) neoadjuvant therapy and to avoid unnecessary toxicity in those who will not. The combination of individual predictors in multivariable prediction models might improve predictive accuracy. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and critically appraise validated pretreatment prediction models (other than radiomics-based models or image-based deep learning models) for response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with rectal cancer and provide evidence-based recommendations for future research. MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase.com, and Scopus were searched for eligible studies published up to November 2022. A total of 5006 studies were screened and 16 were included for data extraction and risk of bias assessment using Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). All selected models were unique and grouped into five predictor categories: clinical, combined, genetics, metabolites, and pathology. Studies generally included patients with intermediate or advanced tumor stages who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Evaluated outcomes were pathological complete response and pathological tumor response. All studies were considered to have a high risk of bias and none of the models were externally validated in an independent study. Discriminative performances, estimated with the area under the curve (AUC), ranged per predictor category from 0.60 to 0.70 (clinical), 0.78 to 0.81 (combined), 0.66 to 0.91 (genetics), 0.54 to 0.80 (metabolites), and 0.71 to 0.91 (pathology). Model calibration outcomes were reported in five studies. Two collagen feature-based models showed the best predictive performance (AUCs 0.83–0.91 and good calibration). In conclusion, some pretreatment models for response prediction in rectal cancer show encouraging predictive potential but, given the high risk of bias in these studies, their value should be evaluated in future, well-designed studies.