Literature DB >> 22902100

Comparison of response evaluation criteria in solid tumors with volumetric measurements for estimation of tumor burden in pancreatic adenocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma.

Jessemae L Welsh1, Kellie Bodeker, Elizabeth Fallon, Sundershan K Bhatia, John M Buatti, Joseph J Cullen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) is the accepted method for determining tumor progression. However, RECIST may not estimate disease burden accurately because the axial plane often does not produce the actual longest diameter. Volumetric measurements may be an alternative to better determine tumor size. Our aim was to compare volumetric measurements with RECIST in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDA) and hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC).
METHODS: RECIST and volumetric measurements were determined in 9 patients with metastatic PDA and 17 patients with HCC who subsequently underwent liver transplantation. Gross pathologic measurements after hepatectomy also were analyzed for volumes.
RESULTS: Three-dimensional diameter in volumetric analysis was 38% and 36% higher than RECIST diameter in PDA and HCC, respectively (P < .01). However, RECIST yielded 78% and 23% larger estimated tumor volumes than volumetric analysis in PDA and HCC, respectively (P < .01). Gross pathologic volume in HCC showed a linear correlation with both volumetric analysis (r = .95; P < .01) and RECIST (r = .96; P < .01) but RECIST significantly overestimated gross pathologic volume by an average of 28% (P < .01) whereas volumetric analysis was similar to gross pathologic volume (P = .56). In categorizing treatment response in PDA, RECIST and volumetric analysis were in moderate agreement (κ = .49).
CONCLUSIONS: RECIST significantly may overestimate tumor burden compared with volumetric measurements in both PDA and HCC. Volumetric analysis may be the preferred method to detect tumor progression. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22902100      PMCID: PMC3496005          DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.07.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  15 in total

1.  Semi-automatic software increases CT measurement accuracy but not response classification of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy.

Authors:  Charlotte S van Kessel; Maarten S van Leeuwen; Petronella O Witteveen; Thomas C Kwee; Helena M Verkooijen; Richard van Hillegersberg
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 3.528

2.  Measuring response in solid tumors: unidimensional versus bidimensional measurement.

Authors:  K James; E Eisenhauer; M Christian; M Terenziani; D Vena; A Muldal; P Therasse
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1999-03-17       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  CT assessment of tumour response to treatment: comparison of linear, cross-sectional and volumetric measures of tumour size.

Authors:  S A Sohaib; B Turner; J A Hanson; M Farquharson; R T Oliver; R H Reznek
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Determination of subcutaneous tumor size in athymic (nude) mice.

Authors:  M M Tomayko; C P Reynolds
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 3.333

5.  Treatment response classification of liver metastatic disease evaluated on imaging. Are RECIST unidimensional measurements accurate?

Authors:  Michael Mantatzis; Stylianos Kakolyris; Kyriakos Amarantidis; Anastasios Karayiannakis; Panos Prassopoulos
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  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

7.  Morphological analysis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma on multidetector row computed tomography: implications for treatment response evaluation.

Authors:  Pedram Rezai; Mary F Mulcahy; Sandra M Tochetto; Senta Berggruen; Vahid Yaghmai
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.327

8.  Comparison of the accuracy of CT volume calculated by circumscription to prolate ellipsoid volume (bidimensional measurement multiplied by coronal long axis).

Authors:  Ali M Rkein; Chivonne Harrigal; Arnold C Friedman; Daniel Persky; Elizabeth Krupinski
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  Automated CT volumetry of pulmonary metastases: the effect of a reduced growth threshold and target lesion number on the reliability of therapy response assessment using RECIST criteria.

Authors:  Katharina Marten; Florian Auer; Stefan Schmidt; Ernst J Rummeny; Christoph Engelke
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-05-10       Impact factor: 7.034

Review 10.  Evaluation of the response to treatment of solid tumours - a consensus statement of the International Cancer Imaging Society.

Authors:  J E Husband; L H Schwartz; J Spencer; L Ollivier; D M King; R Johnson; R Reznek
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-06-14       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  15 in total

1.  Radiologic-pathologic analysis of contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging in patients with HCC after TACE: diagnostic accuracy of 3D quantitative image analysis.

Authors:  Julius Chapiro; Laura D Wood; MingDe Lin; Rafael Duran; Toby Cornish; David Lesage; Vivek Charu; Rüdiger Schernthaner; Zhijun Wang; Vania Tacher; Lynn Jeanette Savic; Ihab R Kamel; Jean-François Geschwind
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Quantitative analysis of tumor volume reduction after three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy for intracranial meningiomas.

Authors:  Nam Kwon Lee; Chul Yong Kim; Won Sup Yoon; Yong Gu Chung; Nam Joon Lee
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Canine urinary bladder transitional cell carcinoma tumor volume is dependent on imaging modality and measurement technique.

Authors:  Andrew J Leffler; Eric T Hostnik; Emma E Warry; Gregory G Habing; Danelle M Auld; Eric M Green; Wm Tod Drost
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 1.363

4.  Identifying Staging Markers for Hepatocellular Carcinoma before Transarterial Chemoembolization: Comparison of Three-dimensional Quantitative versus Non-three-dimensional Imaging Markers.

Authors:  Julius Chapiro; Rafael Duran; MingDe Lin; Rüdiger E Schernthaner; Zhijun Wang; Boris Gorodetski; Jean-François Geschwind
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Mixed Responses to Systemic Therapy Revealed Potential Genetic Heterogeneity and Poor Survival in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Zhong-Yi Dong; Hao-Ran Zhai; Qing-Yi Hou; Jian Su; Si-Yang Liu; Hong-Hong Yan; Yang-Si Li; Zhi-Yong Chen; Wen-Zhao Zhong; Yi-Long Wu
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-01

6.  Prognostic Impact of the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Surgical Resection.

Authors:  Hirokazu Kubo; Takashi Murakami; Ryusei Matsuyama; Yasuhiro Yabushita; Nobuhiro Tsuchiya; Yu Sawada; Yuki Homma; Takafumi Kumamoto; Itaru Endo
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Semiautomated volumetric measurement on postcontrast MR imaging for analysis of recurrent and residual disease in glioblastoma multiforme.

Authors:  D S Chow; J Qi; X Guo; V Z Miloushev; F M Iwamoto; J N Bruce; A B Lassman; L H Schwartz; A Lignelli; B Zhao; C G Filippi
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.825

8.  Functional imaging of interstitial brachytherapy in pancreatic carcinoma xenografts using spectral CT: how does iodine concentration correlate with standardized uptake value of (18)FDG-PET-CT?

Authors:  Shudong Hu; Xiaofeng Shi; Yerong Chen; Wei Huang; Qi Song; Xiaozhu Lin; Yu Liu; Kemin Chen; Zhongmin Wang
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Imaging evaluation of sorafenib for treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Tianying Zheng; Hanyu Jiang; Yi Wei; Zixing Huang; Jie Chen; Ting Duan; Bin Song
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 10.  New approaches for precise response evaluation in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Koichi Hayano; Jorge M Fuentes-Orrego; Dushyant V Sahani
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.