Literature DB >> 22778559

Imaging-based tumor treatment response evaluation: review of conventional, new, and emerging concepts.

Hee Kang1, Ho Yun Lee, Kyung Soo Lee, Jae-Hun Kim.   

Abstract

Tumor response may be assessed readily by the use of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor version 1.1. However, the criteria mainly depend on tumor size changes. These criteria do not reflect other morphologic (tumor necrosis, hemorrhage, and cavitation), functional, or metabolic changes that may occur with targeted chemotherapy or even with conventional chemotherapy. The state-of-the-art multidetector CT is still playing an important role, by showing high-quality, high-resolution images that are appropriate enough to measure tumor size and its changes. Additional imaging biomarker devices such as dual energy CT, positron emission tomography, MRI including diffusion-weighted MRI shall be more frequently used for tumor response evaluation, because they provide detailed anatomic, and functional or metabolic change information during tumor treatment, particularly during targeted chemotherapy. This review elucidates morphologic and functional or metabolic approaches, and new concepts in the evaluation of tumor response in the era of personalized medicine (targeted chemotherapy).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Oncology; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor; Response assessment; Tumor response

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22778559      PMCID: PMC3384819          DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2012.13.4.371

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Korean J Radiol        ISSN: 1229-6929            Impact factor:   3.500


  102 in total

Review 1.  Primary tumor standardized uptake value (SUVmax) measured on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is of prognostic value for survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) by the European Lung Cancer Working Party for the IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project.

Authors:  Thierry Berghmans; Michèle Dusart; Marianne Paesmans; Claude Hossein-Foucher; Irene Buvat; Catherine Castaigne; Arnaud Scherpereel; Céline Mascaux; Michel Moreau; Martine Roelandts; Stéphane Alard; Anne-Pascale Meert; Edward F Patz; Jean-Jacques Lafitte; Jean-Paul Sculier
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 15.609

2.  Early changes in functional dynamic magnetic resonance imaging predict for pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Mei-Lin W Ah-See; Andreas Makris; N Jane Taylor; Mark Harrison; Paul I Richman; Russell J Burcombe; J James Stirling; James A d'Arcy; David J Collins; Michael R Pittam; Duraisamy Ravichandran; Anwar R Padhani
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

Authors:  E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 4.  Drug Insight: gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST)--the solid tumor model for cancer-specific treatment.

Authors:  Stefan Sleijfer; Erik Wiemer; Jaap Verweij
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Oncol       Date:  2008-02

Review 5.  How to assess anti-tumour efficacy by imaging techniques.

Authors:  Stephen J Gwyther; Lawrence H Schwartz
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  Clinical utility of dual-energy CT in the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: initial experience.

Authors:  Eun Jin Chae; Jae-Woo Song; Joon Beom Seo; Bernhard Krauss; Yu Mi Jang; Koun-Sik Song
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Usefulness of FDG-PET for early prediction of the response to gefitinib in non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Noriaki Sunaga; Noboru Oriuchi; Kyoichi Kaira; Noriko Yanagitani; Yoshio Tomizawa; Takeshi Hisada; Tamotsu Ishizuka; Keigo Endo; Masatomo Mori
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 5.705

8.  Lessons learned from independent central review.

Authors:  R Ford; L Schwartz; J Dancey; L E Dodd; E A Eisenhauer; S Gwyther; L Rubinstein; D Sargent; L Shankar; P Therasse; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 9.  Response evaluation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Authors:  Haesun Choi
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2008

10.  Complete metabolic tumour response, assessed by 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG-PET), after induction chemotherapy predicts a favourable outcome in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Authors:  L Decoster; D Schallier; H Everaert; K Nieboer; M Meysman; B Neyns; J De Mey; J De Grève
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 5.705

View more
  25 in total

Review 1.  Imaging genomics in cancer research: limitations and promises.

Authors:  Harrison X Bai; Ashley M Lee; Li Yang; Paul Zhang; Christos Davatzikos; John M Maris; Sharon J Diskin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Texture analysis of diffusion weighted imaging for the evaluation of glioma heterogeneity based on different regions of interest.

Authors:  Shan Wang; Meng Meng; Xue Zhang; Chen Wu; Ru Wang; Jiangfen Wu; Muhammad Umair Sami; Kai Xu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 2.967

3.  Volumetric assessment of lymph node metastases in patients with non-seminomatous germ cell tumours treated with chemotherapy.

Authors:  Carlos I Basilio-de-Leo; Christian I Villeda-Sandoval; Carolina Culebro-García; Francisco Rodríguez-Covarrubias; Ricardo A Castillejos-Molina
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Comparison of the diagnostic performance of response evaluation criteria in solid tumor 1.0 with response evaluation criteria in solid tumor 1.1 on MRI in advanced breast cancer response evaluation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Su Kyung Jeh; Sung Hun Kim; Bong Joo Kang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 3.500

5.  Perfusion parameters of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with rectal cancer: correlation with microvascular density and vascular endothelial growth factor expression.

Authors:  Yeo-Eun Kim; Joon Seok Lim; Junjeong Choi; Daehong Kim; Sungmin Myoung; Myeong-Jin Kim; Ki Whang Kim
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 3.500

6.  In vivo assessment of functional and morphological alterations in tumors under treatment using OCT-angiography combined with OCT-elastography.

Authors:  Marina A Sirotkina; Ekaterina V Gubarkova; Anton A Plekhanov; Alexander A Sovetsky; Vadim V Elagin; Alexander L Matveyev; Lev A Matveev; Sergey S Kuznetsov; Elena V Zagaynova; Natalia D Gladkova; Vladimir Y Zaitsev
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 3.732

7.  Translation in solid cancer: are size-based response criteria an anachronism?

Authors:  M Fernandes; D Rosel; J Brábek
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 8.  Imaging in pleural mesothelioma: A review of the 13th International Conference of the International Mesothelioma Interest Group.

Authors:  Samuel G Armato; Kevin G Blyth; Jane J Keating; Sharyn Katz; Selina Tsim; Johan Coolen; Eyjolfur Gudmundsson; Isabelle Opitz; Anna K Nowak
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2016-09-05       Impact factor: 5.705

9.  Re: Uterine fibroid treatment planning with the diffusion weighted imaging tool.

Authors:  Ferhat Cuce; Emre Karaşahin; Guner Sonmez
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 10.  Imaging biomarkers for evaluating tumor response: RECIST and beyond.

Authors:  Ching-Chung Ko; Lee-Ren Yeh; Yu-Ting Kuo; Jeon-Hor Chen
Journal:  Biomark Res       Date:  2021-07-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.