S A Hayes1, M C Pietanza2, D O'Driscoll3, J Zheng4, C S Moskowitz5, M G Kris6, M S Ginsberg7. 1. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: hayess@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street Breast & Imaging Center, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: pietanzm@mskcc.org. 3. Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin 7, Ireland. Electronic address: deemeagle@gmail.com. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 307 East 63rd Street, New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: zhengj@mskcc.org. 5. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 307 East 63rd Street, New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: moskowc1@mskcc.org. 6. Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street Breast & Imaging Center, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: krism@mskcc.org. 7. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States. Electronic address: ginsberm@mskcc.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the correlations between uni-dimensional RECIST and volumetric measurements in patients with lung adenocarcinoma and to assess their association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study of patients receiving chemotherapy for lung cancer in the setting of a clinical trial, response was prospectively evaluated using RECIST 1.0. Retrospectively, volumetric measurements were recorded and response was assessed by two different volumetric methods at each followup CT scan using a semi-automated segmentation algorithm. We subsequently evaluated the correlation between the uni-dimensional RECIST measurements and the volumetric measurements and performed landmark analyses for OS and PFS at the completion of the first and second follow-ups. Kaplan-Meier curves together with log-rank tests were used to evaluate the association between the different response criteria and patient outcome. RESULTS: Forty-two patients had CT scans at baseline, after the first follow up scan and second followup scan, and then every 8 weeks. The uni-dimensional RECIST measurements and volumetric measurements were strongly correlated, with a Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) of 0.853 at baseline, ρ=0.861 at the first followup, ρ=0.843 at the 2nd followup, and ρ=0.887 overall between-subject. On first follow-up CT, partial responders and non responders as assessed by an "ellipsoid" volumetric criteria showed a significant difference in OS (p=0.008, 1-year OS of 70% for partial responders and 46% for non responders). There was no difference between the groups when assessed by RECIST criteria on first follow-up CT (p=0.841, 1-year OS rate of 64% for partial responders and 64% for non responders). CONCLUSION: Volumetric response on first follow-up CT may better predict OS than RECIST response. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Assessment of tumor size and response is of utmost importance in clinical trials. Volumetric measurements may help to better predict OS than uni-dimensional RECIST criteria.
PURPOSE: To examine the correlations between uni-dimensional RECIST and volumetric measurements in patients with lung adenocarcinoma and to assess their association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study of patients receiving chemotherapy for lung cancer in the setting of a clinical trial, response was prospectively evaluated using RECIST 1.0. Retrospectively, volumetric measurements were recorded and response was assessed by two different volumetric methods at each followup CT scan using a semi-automated segmentation algorithm. We subsequently evaluated the correlation between the uni-dimensional RECIST measurements and the volumetric measurements and performed landmark analyses for OS and PFS at the completion of the first and second follow-ups. Kaplan-Meier curves together with log-rank tests were used to evaluate the association between the different response criteria and patient outcome. RESULTS: Forty-two patients had CT scans at baseline, after the first follow up scan and second followup scan, and then every 8 weeks. The uni-dimensional RECIST measurements and volumetric measurements were strongly correlated, with a Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) of 0.853 at baseline, ρ=0.861 at the first followup, ρ=0.843 at the 2nd followup, and ρ=0.887 overall between-subject. On first follow-up CT, partial responders and non responders as assessed by an "ellipsoid" volumetric criteria showed a significant difference in OS (p=0.008, 1-year OS of 70% for partial responders and 46% for non responders). There was no difference between the groups when assessed by RECIST criteria on first follow-up CT (p=0.841, 1-year OS rate of 64% for partial responders and 64% for non responders). CONCLUSION: Volumetric response on first follow-up CT may better predict OS than RECIST response. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Assessment of tumor size and response is of utmost importance in clinical trials. Volumetric measurements may help to better predict OS than uni-dimensional RECIST criteria.
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
Authors: Binsheng Zhao; Lawrence H Schwartz; Li Jiang; Jane Colville; Chaya Moskowitz; Liang Wang; Robert Leftowitz; Fan Liu; John Kalaigian Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Mizuki Nishino; Mengye Guo; David M Jackman; Pamela J DiPiro; Jeffrey T Yap; Tak K Ho; Hiroto Hatabu; Pasi A Jänne; Annick D Van den Abbeele; Bruce E Johnson Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2010-10-30 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Ronan J Kelly; Arun Rajan; Jeremy Force; Ariel Lopez-Chavez; Corrine Keen; Liang Cao; Yunkai Yu; Peter Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Mark Raffeld; Liqiang Xi; Seth M Steinberg; John J Wright; Shivaani Kummar; Martin Gutierrez; Giuseppe Giaccone Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jedd D Wolchok; Axel Hoos; Steven O'Day; Jeffrey S Weber; Omid Hamid; Celeste Lebbé; Michele Maio; Michael Binder; Oliver Bohnsack; Geoffrey Nichol; Rachel Humphrey; F Stephen Hodi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-11-24 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Gaia Schiavon; Alessandro Ruggiero; Patrick Schöffski; Bronno van der Holt; Dave J Bekers; Karel Eechoute; Vincent Vandecaveye; Gabriel P Krestin; Jaap Verweij; Stefan Sleijfer; Ron H J Mathijssen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Cleo P Rogatko; Chick Weisse; Tobias Schwarz; Allyson C Berent; Marcio A Diniz Journal: J Vet Intern Med Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Brandon S Imber; Andrew L Lin; Zhigang Zhang; Krishna Nand Keshavamurthy; Amy Robin Deipolyi; Kathryn Beal; Marc A Cohen; Viviane Tabar; Lisa M DeAngelis; Eliza B Geer; T Jonathan Yang; Robert J Young Journal: J Endocr Soc Date: 2019-07-02