BACKGROUND & AIMS: The current study analysed the association between radiologic tumour response and survival times of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who were treated with transcatheter hepatic arterial chemoembolization (TACE). METHODS: Among 493 consecutive patients presenting to our institution between July 2002 and June 2010 with radiologically (n = 398) or histologically (n = 95) confirmed HCC, 368 patients who met inclusion criteria, underwent TACE and had confirmed survival data were retrospectively reviewed. The radiologic response was assessed using RECIST 1.1, EASL and mRECIST criteria at 1 month after the initial TACE. RESULTS: By univariate analysis, higher Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, bilobar and multifocal distribution of tumours, larger tumour size (>5 cm), higher serum alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) level (>200 ng/ml), no subsequent radiofrequency ablation, advanced ECOG, UNOS and BCLC staging, absence of complete necrosis and non-responder (SD or PD) in RECIST 1.1, EASL and mRECIST response assessment were significantly associated with shorter overall survival times. By Cox proportional hazards model, advanced age, presence of ascites, higher MELD score, advanced BCLC staging, absence of complete necrosis and non-responder by RECIST 1.1, EASL and mRECIST criteria were independent and significant prognosticators for overall survival times in patients with HCC who underwent TACE. By time-dependent ROC curve analysis, mRECIST response criteria showed greatest accuracy in predicting survival (AUROC = 0.8676), followed by EASL (AUROC = 0.8471) and RECIST 1.1 (AUROC = 0.7986). CONCLUSION: mRECIST and EASL criteria for assessing radiologic response 1 month after initial TACE more consistently predict the differences in overall survival between responders and non-responders than conventional RECIST 1.1 criteria.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The current study analysed the association between radiologic tumour response and survival times of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who were treated with transcatheter hepatic arterial chemoembolization (TACE). METHODS: Among 493 consecutive patients presenting to our institution between July 2002 and June 2010 with radiologically (n = 398) or histologically (n = 95) confirmed HCC, 368 patients who met inclusion criteria, underwent TACE and had confirmed survival data were retrospectively reviewed. The radiologic response was assessed using RECIST 1.1, EASL and mRECIST criteria at 1 month after the initial TACE. RESULTS: By univariate analysis, higher Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, bilobar and multifocal distribution of tumours, larger tumour size (>5 cm), higher serum alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) level (>200 ng/ml), no subsequent radiofrequency ablation, advanced ECOG, UNOS and BCLC staging, absence of complete necrosis and non-responder (SD or PD) in RECIST 1.1, EASL and mRECIST response assessment were significantly associated with shorter overall survival times. By Cox proportional hazards model, advanced age, presence of ascites, higher MELD score, advanced BCLC staging, absence of complete necrosis and non-responder by RECIST 1.1, EASL and mRECIST criteria were independent and significant prognosticators for overall survival times in patients with HCC who underwent TACE. By time-dependent ROC curve analysis, mRECIST response criteria showed greatest accuracy in predicting survival (AUROC = 0.8676), followed by EASL (AUROC = 0.8471) and RECIST 1.1 (AUROC = 0.7986). CONCLUSION: mRECIST and EASL criteria for assessing radiologic response 1 month after initial TACE more consistently predict the differences in overall survival between responders and non-responders than conventional RECIST 1.1 criteria.
Authors: Emmanuel A Tsochatzis; Evangelia Fatourou; James O'Beirne; Tim Meyer; Andrew K Burroughs Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Pippa H Newell; YingXing Wu; Helena Hoen; Richa Uppal; John Tyler Thiesing; Kevin Sasadeusz; Maria A Cassera; Ronald F Wolf; Paul Hansen; Chet W Hammill Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Matthew P Lungren; Alexander J Towbin; Derek J Roebuck; Eric J Monroe; Anne E Gill; Avnesh Thakor; Richard B Towbin; Anne Marie Cahill; C Matthew Hawkins Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2018-01-23
Authors: Aline Mähringer-Kunz; Arndt Weinmann; Irene Schmidtmann; Sandra Koch; Sebastian Schotten; Daniel Pinto Dos Santos; Michael Bernhard Pitton; Christoph Dueber; Peter Robert Galle; Roman Kloeckner Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Bruno Vincenzi; Massimo Di Maio; Marianna Silletta; Loretta D'Onofrio; Chiara Spoto; Maria Carmela Piccirillo; Gennaro Daniele; Francesca Comito; Eliana Maci; Giuseppe Bronte; Antonio Russo; Daniele Santini; Francesco Perrone; Giuseppe Tonini Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-31 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Nathan Haywood; Kyle Gennaro; John Obert; Paul F Sauer; David T Redden; Jessica Zarzour; J Kevin Smith; David Bolus; Souheil Saddekni; Ahmed Kamel Abdel Aal; Stephen Gray; Jared White; Devin E Eckhoff; Derek A DuBay Journal: J Oncol Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 4.375