Literature DB >> 25714313

RECIST 1.1 compared with RECIST 1.0 in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy.

Katherine M Krajewski1, Mizuki Nishino, Nikhil H Ramaiya, Toni K Choueiri.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) is the most widely accepted method to objectively assess response to therapy in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy. Both RECIST 1.0 and 1.1 have been used to assess response to VEGF-targeted therapies; however, systematic comparisons are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty-two patients with metastatic RCC treated with VEGF-targeted therapies were retrospectively studied. Tumor measurements and response assessment according to RECIST 1.1 and RECIST 1.0 were compared, including the number of target lesions, baseline measurements, response at each follow-up, best overall response, and time to progression (TTP). Morphologic changes and new enhancement were also assessed over the course of treatment, and TTP was evaluated using morphologic change criteria in combination with RECIST 1.1. RESULTS. The number of target lesions according to RECIST 1.1 was significantly fewer than by RECIST 1.0 (median, 2 vs 4; p < 0.0001). At first imaging follow-up, the percentage change of the sums of the diameter measurements by RECIST 1.1 and RECIST 1.0 were highly concordant (R = 0.857; mean shrinkage, 12.1% by RECIST 1.1 vs 10.8% by RECIST 1.0). Best response assessment was highly concordant between the two criteria (weighted κ = 0.819). There was no evidence of a difference in TTP by the two criteria, with a median TTP of 8.9 months (95% CI for the median, 5.5-13.9) by RECIST 1.1 and 8.9 months (95% CI for the median, 5.8-13.6) by RECIST 1.0. The median TTP by RECIST 1.1 alone was 8.9 months compared with 5.6 months for RECIST 1.1 and morphologic changes combined. CONCLUSION. RECIST 1.1 and RECIST 1.0 response assessments were overall highly concordant in patients with RCC treated with VEGF-targeted therapy, with fewer target lesions according to RECIST 1.1 but no difference in TTP.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST); renal cell carcinoma; tumor response assessment; vascular endothelial growth factor–targeted therapy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25714313      PMCID: PMC4352691          DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.13236

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  24 in total

1.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  New Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: comparison with original RECIST and impact on assessment of tumor response to targeted therapy.

Authors:  Mizuki Nishino; David M Jackman; Hiroto Hatabu; Beow Y Yeap; Leigh-Anne Cioffredi; Jeffrey T Yap; Pasi A Jänne; Bruce E Johnson; Annick D Van den Abbeele
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Bernard Escudier; Tim Eisen; Walter M Stadler; Cezary Szczylik; Stéphane Oudard; Michael Siebels; Sylvie Negrier; Christine Chevreau; Ewa Solska; Apurva A Desai; Frédéric Rolland; Tomasz Demkow; Thomas E Hutson; Martin Gore; Scott Freeman; Brian Schwartz; Minghua Shan; Ronit Simantov; Ronald M Bukowski
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-01-11       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Sunitinib versus interferon alfa in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Robert J Motzer; Thomas E Hutson; Piotr Tomczak; M Dror Michaelson; Ronald M Bukowski; Olivier Rixe; Stéphane Oudard; Sylvie Negrier; Cezary Szczylik; Sindy T Kim; Isan Chen; Paul W Bycott; Charles M Baum; Robert A Figlin
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-01-11       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.

Authors:  L I Lin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Assessing tumor response and detecting recurrence in metastatic renal cell carcinoma on targeted therapy: importance of size and attenuation on contrast-enhanced CT.

Authors:  Andrew Dennis Smith; Michael L Lieber; Shetal N Shah
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Comparison of four early posttherapy imaging changes (EPTIC; RECIST 1.0, tumor shrinkage, computed tomography tumor density, Choi criteria) in assessing outcome to vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Katherine M Krajewski; Mengye Guo; Annick D Van den Abbeele; Jeffrey Yap; Nikhil Ramaiya; Jyothi Jagannathan; Daniel Y C Heng; Michael B Atkins; David F McDermott; Fabio A B Schutz; Ivan Pedrosa; Toni K Choueiri
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Effect of RECIST revision on classification of target lesions and overall response in advanced gastric cancer patients.

Authors:  Nozomu Fuse; Emiko Nagahisa-Oku; Toshihiko Doi; Takahide Sasaki; Shogo Nomura; Takashi Kojima; Tomonori Yano; Makoto Tahara; Takayuki Yoshino; Atsushi Ohtsu
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 7.370

10.  Sunitinib efficacy against advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Robert J Motzer; M Dror Michaelson; Jonathan Rosenberg; Ronald M Bukowski; Brendan D Curti; Daniel J George; Gary R Hudes; Bruce G Redman; Kim A Margolin; George Wilding
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-09-17       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  8 in total

1.  CT evaluation of response in advanced gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors treated with long-acting-repeatable octreotide: what is the optimal size variation threshold?

Authors:  Yanji Luo; Jie Chen; Bingqi Shen; Meng Wang; Huasong Cai; Ling Xu; Luohai Chen; Minhu Chen; Zi-Ping Li; Shi-Ting Feng
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Early tumor shrinkage is independently associated with improved overall survival among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a validation study using the COMPARZ cohort.

Authors:  Viktor Grünwald; Marion Dietrich; Gregory R Pond
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Imaging for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Soumya V L Vig; Elcin Zan; Stella K Kang
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2020-06-11       Impact factor: 2.241

4.  Intra- and inter-reader agreement of iRECIST and RECIST 1.1 criteria for the assessment of tumor response in patients receiving checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy for lung cancer.

Authors:  Sandra Huicochea Castellanos; Andrew Pagano; Andrew J Plodkowski; Jeffrey Girshman; Matthew D Hellmann; Hira Rizvi; Jessica Flynn; Junting Zheng; Marinela Capanu; Darragh F Halpenny; Michelle S Ginsberg
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 5.705

5.  Evaluation of circulating cell-free DNA as a molecular monitoring tool in patients with metastatic cancer.

Authors:  Clemens Hufnagl; Michael Leisch; Lukas Weiss; Thomas Melchardt; Martin Moik; Daniela Asslaber; Geisberger Roland; Philipp Steininger; Thomas Meissnitzer; Daniel Neureiter; Richard Greil; Alexander Egle
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2019-12-09       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  Influence of Radiation Dose and Reconstruction Kernel on Fat Fraction Analysis in Dual-energy CT: A Phantom Study.

Authors:  Vasiliki Chatzaraki; Corinna Born; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Johannes M Froehlich; Michael J Thali; Tilo Niemann
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.155

Review 7.  Pazopanib as a second-line treatment for non-cytokine-treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis of the effect of treatment.

Authors:  Victor C Kok; Jung-Tsung Kuo
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 8.  Comparison of the RECIST 1.0 and RECIST 1.1 in patients treated with targeted agents: a pooled analysis and review.

Authors:  Jung Han Kim
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-03-22
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.