Mathilde Masse

Mathilde Masse

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Mathilde Masse has a total of 10 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:

  • Olivier Humbert

    Service de médecine nucléaire, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Nice, France; CNRS, Inserm, iBV, université Côte D'Azur, Nice, France

    2 shared publications
  • Anne Creisson

    Service d'oncologie, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Nice, France

    1 shared publication
  • Caroline Bailleux

    Service d'oncologie, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Nice, France

    1 shared publication
  • David Chardin

    Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nuclear Medicine Department, Nice, France

    1 shared publication
  • Jacques Darcourt

    Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nuclear Medicine Department, Nice, France

    1 shared publication
  • Josiane Otto

    Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Oncology Department, Nice, France

    1 shared publication

Latest Publications

  • Imagerie moléculaire et radio-ligands dans le cancer du sein

    by Mathilde Masse, Caroline Bailleux, Anne Creisson, Olivier Humbert


  • Open Access

    [18F]FDG-PET/CT atypical response patterns to immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients: long term prognosis assessment and clinical management proposal

    by Mathilde Masse, David Chardin, Pierre Tricarico, Victoria Ferrari, Nicolas Martin, Josiane Otto, Jacques Darcourt, Victor Comte, Olivier Humbert

    Aim: To determine the long-term prognosis of immune-related response profiles (pseudoprogression and dissociated response), not covered by conventional PERCIST criteria, in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs). Methods: 109 patients were prospectively included and underwent [18F]FDG-PET/CT at baseline, after 7 weeks (PETinterim1), and 3 months (PETinterim2) of treatment. On PETinterim1, tumor response was assessed using standard PERCIST criteria. In the event of PERCIST progression at this time-point, the study design provided for continued immunotherapy for 6 more weeks. Additional response patterns were then considered on PETinterim2: pseudo-progression (PsPD, subsequent metabolic response); dissociated response (DR, coexistence of responding and non-responding lesions), and confirmed progressive metabolic disease (cPMD, subsequent homogeneous progression of lesions). Patients were followed up for at least 12 months. Results: Median follow-up was 21 months. At PETinterim1, PERCIST progression was observed in 60% (66/109) of patients and ICPI was continued in 59/66. At the subsequent PETinterim2, 14% of patients showed PsPD, 11% DR, 35% cPMD, and 28% had a sustained metabolic response. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free-survival (PFS) did not differ between PsPD and DR (27 vs 29 months, p = 1.0; 17 vs 12 months, p = 0.2, respectively). The OS and PFS of PsPD/DR patients were significantly better than those with cPMD (29 vs 9 months, p < 0.02; 16 vs 2 months, p < 0.001), but worse than those with sustained metabolic response (p < 0.001). This 3-group prognostic stratification enabled better identification of true progressors, outperforming the prognostic value of standard PERCIST criteria (p = 0.03). Conclusion: [18F]FDG-PET/CT enables early assessment of response to immunotherapy. The new wsPERCIST (“wait and see”) PET criteria proposed, comprising immune-related atypical response patterns, can refine conventional prognostic stratification based on PERCIST criteria. Trial registration: HDH F20230309081206. Registered 20 April 2023. Retrospectively registered.